Zeitgeist Movement Activist and Orientation Guide

The Zeitgeist Movement is not a political movement. It does not recognize nations, governments, races, religions, creeds or class. Our understandings conclude that these are false, outdated distinctions which are far from positive factors for true collective human growth and potential. Their basis is in power division and stratification, not unity and equality, which is our goal.

While it is important to understand that everything in life is a natural progression, we must also acknowledge the reality that the human species has the ability to drastically slow and paralyze progress, through social structures which are out of date, dogmatic, and hence out of line with nature itself. The world you see today, full of war, corruption, elitism, pollution, poverty, epidemic disease, human rights abuses, inequality and crime is the result of this paralysis.

This movement is about awareness, in avocation of a fluid evolutionary progress, both personal, social, technological and spiritual. It recognizes that the human species is on a natural path for unification, derived from a communal acknowledgment of fundamental and near empirical understandings of how nature works and how we as humans fit into/are a part of this universal unfolding we call life.

While this path does exist, it is unfortunately hindered and not recognized by the great majority of humans, who continue to perpetuate outdated and hence degenerative modes of conduct and association. It is this intellectual irrelevancy which the Zeitgeist Movement hopes to overcome through education and social action.

The movement itself is not a centralized construct. We are not here to lead, but to organize and educate.

457 Comments / User Reviews

Venus/Zeitgeist are quite well presented and well argued. Communal utopia sounds great.

Of course, human nature has been human nature under dozens of different economies and governmental systems for millennia. That won't change in this utopia. You simply will never get people (on average) of high training/effort to accept that they must work harder and receive the same as those who work/study/know/are skilled less. Plus the underlying premise has the same short-coming as Marx found. Somebody needs to lead/enforce/run this utopia (read "Vanguard of the Proletariate"). In this system it's the designers and operators of the computer government who become the puppet masters behind the scenes as opposed to today's politicians, corporate interests, etc. And on that topic, good luck getting masses of people to trust life-control decisions to computers.

Everything is okay but can anyone tell me how can we ( i ) live without getting hurt by monetary system ? Tell me what can i do personally about my life ? How can i solve this problem or money issues of my own.I just dont wanna make them richer and spend the money which i dont own or be a debt slave.Tell me how to manage money

How many more times are we going to have to correct the following problem? NOWHERE does the Bible say money is the root of evil, it's the LOVE of money. It's annoying enough to attempt a discussion with people who use faith in the Bible as proof of an argument. Misquoting the Bible makes it absolutely impossible. Come on! If you're going to support a certain perspective, can you PLEASE make sure you know what it is??? I'm completely at my wits' end. These days, Christians showing up in an debate makes me want to leave it immediately. It's only my intense desire to know all sides of an issue, as well as an ability to suppress horrified bewilderment that people can be so sure and so uniformed at the same time, that's kept me from avoiding comments sections completely. GAH! I am begging here.

1) You want to clean up the environment yet you want to create a lot more technology which requires toxins to create. Computers have been around more than 30 years yet no one can build them totally green yet. 2) Not all behavior is learned. What about the 5 year old that comes from a loving, caring, nurturing family yet destroys toys, murders the family dog and tries to murder his siblings or parents - how will you deal with those people? 3) What about the people that just want to sit around and get high on drugs and do not want to contribute to this society? 4) Or what about the people who are just plain lazy already and would rather steal or scam by turning in financial aid claims under a dozen different names though quite capable of working and contributing? I am a criminologist. These type of people are not going to change.

Plus, if everything is computerized they can track your every movement through it - Do you really want that?

As long as people actually believe in religion and refuse to let it go, this movement could and would never work.. I say the Spartans had the right Idea. just kill off all the handicapped, sick, fat & lazy(nonproductive)crack addicts, religious people, and all other non conformists. I am all for an equal, safe, healthy, cooperative world and agree with most of the ideas of the zeitgeist movements. Too bad 99% off all people on earth would have to be exterminated for it to work. For the record I am fine with that also as long as I am in the 1%. How Ironic ...Too bad I am poor and more likely to be in the 99%. sux lol

dont comment when u dont know anything specially if u believe in god even if think u know every thing for exemple follow the creater of this website he has watch alot of documentary film so he know alot but he never comment cause he knows he can be wrong he isn t perfect
i hope u have learn a lesson from my comment

I just want to say i support grass roots capitalism,its just monopoly nature of giant corporations that even Adam Smith did not approve of.

This is not Zeiygeist yet sadly it would take another world war before this become a zeitgeist. Corporate greed and brainwashing wll ensure we dont use technology to help the poor.

All the alternative energy bit makes too much sense , but it wont be done for a long time because the corpoates see less money in them and they have the governments with their lobby groups in their pockets.

This makes too much sense for ret*rded stupid masses to agree and understand, i dont think it is a zeitgeist yet, its zeitgeist after id**t humans have had another world war.
Venus project is pretty much anticapitalism, its communism with love for technology.

For all the people who disagree to this guy, keep drinking beer, woking on low paying jobs and cheer up billionaires you id**ts.

This won't require the destruction of all societies, but only those who resist the idea and keep putting profit before people. Those areas of the world who secure a social model promoting self-sufficiency may be the first stepping stone, and a government who can move to resource management over financial management. ERP technology may be the thing to learn.

ALL CRITICS HERE - I challenge you to instead provide an answer to the obviously FALSE and BROKEN cycle of economic destructiveness which stares at you through your television, your computer and your tax return - right in the eye and you don't blink because you look at it every day so it looks normal. Give us all a better answer than this, and I'll follow you instead.

This will not take place til after the collapes of society. There might be another dark ages between the end of one and the start of another.
As shown by the fall of certain governments in the world maybe it has started. The world debt crisis, global enviromental problems and world population will be add to and speed up the end

This is dishonest. I can understand the idea behind this, but to say that money is the root of all evil, thus 'f*** money', is simply foolishness, and to say that "the banks are stealing from the working poor to give to the leisurely rich" (0:22:40 or so) is the most gross misrepresentation. Banks use money put into savings in investing, theoretically for a profit (although not always); this is the interest earned, and banks also take a risk on lending money (the risk, obviously, is that the money will not be returned). If you can't present basic economics and incentives in this way, then you are too ignorant to have an opinion, much less to try to inform others on what their opinions should be.

Basic economics you say? I think you don't know how the system works. How is there risk in a bank loaning out money when it makes the money out of thin air? Learn how the system works and reconsider what you said. The Central banks prints money from nothing, Loans it to governments which in tern pays back the private central banks with interest. Interest that must come from the sweat and blood of its citizens and does nothing to benefit the citizens. For every $1 the lower banks have they can loan out $9. All the money is made from nothing and has the consequence of enslaving the population so those who print the money have control.

i believe this model is what the Antichrist will come up with as a solution and the masses will follow him. and God knows better

ladyjane13
- 04/05/2012 at 08:12

This model isn't the work of the Antichrist. I am highly skeptical that any such thing exists, as the story of the Antichrist along with the entire Bible/Qur'an are most likely mere works of fiction.
However, if we were to point to the manifestation of the Antichrist, then it would more accurately be towards Imperialist America which is controlled by that wealthy 1%. This is the most evil phenomenon that exists in our world today.
There are scholars whom believe that many members of the most influential positions of American society; bankers, the controlled media, and some politicians, are involved in a secret societies such as Illuminati, Skull and Bones, Freemasons, and similar societies. The argument goes that the members of such societies are risen to power through the worship of 'the beast', and serve to further their own power and wealth whilst corrupting humanity and causing human suffering on earth.
Whilst this belief is rather dogmatic in and of itself, if we were to humor the idea that the Illuminati is in fact the Antichrist, then this movement, is by default; Christ. Because this movement is what will save humanity from the hell on earth that the Antichrist (Corporate America) has served us.

Nate Mcclennen
- 08/08/2011 at 03:50

This is beautifull. Someone please share their love and hope for utopian dreams such as this.

Most of the communities in India (such as Bengali), are succumbed in 'Culture of Poverty'(a theory introduced by an American anthropologist Oscar Lewis), irrespective of cl-ass or economic strata, lives in pavement or apartment. Nobody is at all ashamed of the deep-rooted corruption, decaying general quality of life, worst Politico-administrative system, weak mother language, continuous absorption of common space (mental as well as physical, both). We are becoming fathers & mothers only by self-procreation, mindlessly & blindfold. Simply depriving their(the children) fundamental rights of a decent, caring society, fearless & dignified living. Do not ever look for any other positive alternative behaviour (values) to perform human way of parenthood, i.e. deliberately co-parenting of those children those are born out of ignorance, real poverty. All of us are being driven only by the very animal instinct. If the Bengali people ever be able to bring that genuine freedom (from vicious cycle of 'poverty') in their own life/attitude, involve themselves in 'Production of Space' (Henri Lefebvre), at least initiate a movement by heart, decent & dedicated Politics will definitely come up. - Siddhartha Bandyopadhyay, 16/4, Girish Banerjee Lane, Howrah-711101, India.

Ugh I would hate to live in a world like that! I need my pain to know joy!I need hard times to develop a thick skin! I need failure in order to progress! I would never rob future generations of that! I feel sorry for those born with silver spoons in their mouths, they have least perspective. And for me, that's what's important in life.

You are clearly a fool and deserve to live in a wretched, unequal society. How can any person with some basic reasoning think that we need a harsh unfair society, in fact, you clearly haven't had a hard life at all, as anybody who suffered REAL hardships (as we see in developing countries) would never wish the same on their children.

avd420
- 08/22/2011 at 12:55

Thanks for the judgements. They would hurt a little if they were anywhere close to accurate.

marcelof01
- 07/01/2012 at 03:10

I grown up in a developing country, a very rich place from the resources point of view, but its children are starving thanks to the current economy model... Certainly I wouldn't want that for my or anyone else's children, or even adults... The current system is based on killing or deceiving each other in an endless loop of 'monetary circulation'

avd420
- 04/06/2013 at 14:03

Im revisiting this after a couple years. "Anyone who has experienced REAL hardships (as we see ON TV in developing countries)." And thanks for the well wishes, as I said, a wretched, unequal society will only make me a stronger person. And as far as wishing on children goes, if you have any, then I would love to see them suffer greatly, if they have the balls, maybe they'll be better because of it. Or you could keep them in a sheltered suburban home and in a permanent state of adolescence. Man, I'm really sick of paying for your kids. Like really sick of it.

WiseGapist
- 04/06/2013 at 17:58

Haha sounds like you haven't worked out your issues over these years... You have such a warped view of psychology it surprises me you're able to function in society. I see you added 'ON TV', do you suppose that seeing famine at work on a television screen is a lie? Are the starving children actually loving their miserable existence?

Whose kids are you paying for, and how are you paying for them? And surely IF you are paying for them and causing yourself to live with less then you should be happy, because you live in an upside-down world where a painful existence is a good thing, so sit back and enjoy your misery. You can raise a child to live on their own, unsheltered from reality, within suburbia and not put them through extreme hardships. There is a difference between suffering and meeting challenges to mature, studying at university and holding a job at the same time will help you mature, it is not suffering... Living in poverty, having constant hardship, does not forge a better person. Go take some psychology classes, they usually start with developmental psychology, that should show you how foolish your view is without even scratching the surface of the subject.

avd420
- 04/06/2013 at 20:57

"I see you added 'ON TV', do you suppose that seeing famine at work on a television screen is a lie?"

Yes, in fact, that's exactly what I'm saying. I experienced this lie the last time I was there. It exists buy guilty white folks to get your money.

"Whose kids are you paying for, and how are you paying for them?"

Yours and everyone elses, every week, 40% of my check. I pay for your kids, so you can then use your kids "safety" as an excuse to limit my rights.

"And surely IF you are paying for them and causing yourself to live with less then you should be happy, because you live in an upside-down world where a painful existence is a good thing, so sit back and enjoy your misery."

Excellent rebuttal there.

"studying at university and holding a job at the same time will help you mature, it is not suffering..."

Which is another point. Paying for your kids government loan so he/she can ultimately end up as someone with an English Degree whom has s*it loads of debt and is on food stamps because we never needed another English teacher in the first place.

" Living in poverty, having constant hardship, does not forge a better person."

Unless that person has a strong will. if not, I could give a f*ck what happens to them. And if you think there is too much of that, than let me ask you, why bring another mouth into the world to begin with?

"Go take some psychology classes, they usually start with developmental psychology, that should show you how foolish your view is without even scratching the surface of the subject."

Since we're recommending s*it, I recommend you check out RD Laing.

WiseGapist
- 04/10/2013 at 18:31

How pathetically small-minded you are, from the quality of your writing and ability to apply thought it would seem you could have benefited from a university education, all be it taken via a student loan.^

'Yours and everyone elses, every week, 40% of my check. I pay for your kids, so you can then use your kids "safety" as an excuse to limit my rights.'

Firstly, I don't have children, I am just not so bitter as to be incapable of considering what circumstances would be conducive to forming a well-rounded human being. I presume from your nonsense you're referring to a 40% tax rate? Do you understand the allocation of tax money? Which of your 'rights' are infringed through protecting children? Your 'right' to stand outside a school jerking off? Your 'right' to do over 40mph on school roads?

You make an extremely poor case for the emotional benefits of being raised in hardship, as you claim to have been, and it appears to have twisted you into a cold, unforgiving, child hating as*hole who wants everybody else to experience the same misery, though your denial is such that you view it as useful and necessary.

Regarding your views on third-world poverty, maybe read a little more about the CEO's of charities taking ridiculously large salaries and understand the difference between that, and it being a lie that the suffering exists.

I'll leave you with an R. D. Laing quote,
'Whether life is worth living depends on whether there is love in life.'

xD

j w
- 06/16/2011 at 20:05

Ok. Here's my issue with this. The whole entire world works on a monetary system and until you get all of these processes up and working (which will require money but not gain any) the system cannot survive. I also find the discrediting of "Human nature" a bit foolish due to fact that humans are not logical machines that it would take to make this system work but are slightly logical ANIMALS. You also have to take into the account that most of the population of the world are very much set in the viral ideas that would not allow this system to work. The world is selfish, greedy, aggressive as dictated by the means in what it takes to survive and flourish. In order to get this type of logical utopia the notions of pre-existing viral ideas would have to be erased (meaning that you would have to get rid of the people who spread and live by them A.K.A MOST OF THE WORLD). You also lost me at computers making decisions for the human population. I get the whole computers having more information and logic thing but don't you think it would be a little more comforting that PEOPLE deciding the fate of PEOPLE. Since when is having a dictatorship a good thing even if done by artificial Intelligence? Logic might be the best course for action but I doubt it is always the best course for ingrained human moral action. This looks like it could be a better system than the old fashioned out of date foolish one we have today but it's hardly a one size fits all.

Zeitgeist is fraudulent, like many media mediums it is there to encapsulate the minds. This time the niche they've found is decent peoples need to see good done. Unlike my brother and some of my friends (the ones that give a damn) I never trusted the zeitgeist movement, notice that in their videos, the vision of future cities always have a lot less people living in them. Their rhetoric sways good people into assuming the same ideals as the N.W.O, the bilderberg group, who are already building one of these sustainable cities. Sounds great but their agenda is depopulation - the murder of 4 million people. For those avid Zeitgeist followers, you've probably already seen it but I refer you to 'David De Rothschild at Zeitgeist Europe 07' on youtube. Here you'll see him, David Cameron and Tom Brokaw plugging carbon tax which is actually charging you for the air you breath and paying for this city project. Ironically once 2 million can be housed they wont need that tax because due to a few already beta tested diseases most of you won't be breathing. So please people, oppose zeitgeist, they are laughing at you right now at how they were the ones that did the impossible and charged you for air and how easily they manipulate the good meaning people of the world. As a side note, its said that the depopulation is need because people consume to much and the Earth can only sustain 2 million... Not true, with the means at our disposal she could sustain another 2 million on top of the 6 that already inhabit her. Also it would only take 100 years to colonise Mars only 25 years until people are living permanently on the surface. If only people would realise that life IS hard work and we must all pull our weight. The true reason for 2m is that 2m is easier to control than 6m, 8m or 10m. Most people don't trust Bill Gates, Google or the Rothschilds but these are just some of the benefactors the Zeitgeist movement

I think you mean billions instead of millions. The ideas given in this documentary are mainly to increase the comfort of the lives of everyone around the world. Where did you get this idea that this specific movement wants to genocide most of the population and how do you know what can be done in terms of making planets habitable? We can't even make a bio-dome, why do you think we are capable of making an entire planet sustainable for our survival? Will we need to control human population? Yes. Does it mean we need to start killing people? No. The human population as it stands now is like an unstoppable growing consuming cancer that has no regard for the sustainability of ourselves of anything else on this planet. The documentary is just giving their opinion at a sustainable human civilization. Just because some of their ideas may be in common to people who may want to depopulate the world does not mean they agree with them. Should everyone follow the movement? No. Due to the fact that a single group of idealism has never worked and never will work in the world. But people should consider some of the ideas they are generating.

Nick Arrizza
- 05/01/2011 at 20:03

There is now a way to individually and collectively erase the "experiential" component that makes up what we commonly consider as "human nature" so as to help individuals remember and re-experience their "true" unadulterated human nature as divine creative beings of love. It's called the Mind Resonance Process (MRP).

This is a great film and something that should inspire everyone to step out of their unconscious state and into an empowered and self determined state of being.

So are we to think that man is not ever to be accountable for their own actions? Sure put a person from birth forward in a "perfect" world, that still will not change his or her inate inclinations when headed the "wrong" way. The video said, "Science and technology are divinity in action. In the infamous wrds of Jeff Dunhams puppet Peanut, "Polish a turd, it's still a turd."

A gross misperception of internal and external nature, machines cannot provide equilibrium. Unpredictability, occurring as part of free choice is as vital as the biodynamics keeping nature fertile. Diverse populations require diverse means of technology. Doing away with a global economy that puts profit above peace is a good idea, replacing it with an economy that relies on physical technology, above all others, is not. You can never fully map human or environmental evolution because it occurs too swiftly. Although technology shouldn't be blamed for the atrocities of war, neither should it be worshipped as a means to remove human equivocation.

The Venus Project is not practical, considering greed, jealousy and manipulation can all occur without physical incentive. Not to mention that the initial curators would only be afforded their technological prowess through previous involvement in capitalism. A perfect loophole for papal science. As with Marxism, the major flaw is not in the ideal but in underestimating the intermediary arena.

I feel silly asking this question; however, I realize that there is all lot that I simply don't know and understand. How do I began my journey to undo or unlearn all of the things that society has condition us to believe. I know one may say, "It's simple...read!" But where do I began? What do I read? What do I look for. I guess I would have to start in the area that I want to know first. I apologize for my ignorance but my questions are sincere. Thank you in advance for your assistance. My first step will be to eliminate the useless hours of television watching...and I will read...read...read and draw my own conclusions. My goal is to be the best person that I can be! Moreover, I wish to learn from others, share information, and hopefully educate others who also feel like the are deaf, dumb, and blind.

Read books that challenge yet interest you, as your interests grow so will your capacity to filter challenging material. Over time try to cover the origin of philosophy, art, religion and science. Use the arts to digest the sciences. A good place to start is the 'Golden Bough' by Frazer. Take out many books from the library, start them all, carry on with the ones you most enjoy and work at the ones that intrigue you but take longer to obsorb. You will find that you have skill with certain subjects, keep reading up on these but injecting new challenges into your diet. All knowledge is interconnected and requires an interconnected community to interpret and apply it. Happy Reading x

jubbs_sher
- 03/25/2011 at 09:57

take mushrooms and sit in the forest for a bit - and of course read heaps!

"We've got to move on". That was a motto of the modern age of progress which accelerated us into the present crap. Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat its mistakes, as someone said. IMHO, it's stronger. Those who dump history have no future. Mindless gadflies, "They fly, forgotten, as a dream
Dies at the opening day." OGT

Blah,blah, blah, blah,Blah,blah, blah, blah
Blah,blah, blah, blah,Blah,blah, blah, blah,
Blah,blah, blah, blah,Blah,blah, blah, blah,
Blah,blah, blah, blah,Blah,blah, blah, blah,
Blah,blah, blah, blah.
I believe in the "Zeitgeist Movement". The only thing about the past I care to remember is it is now,
OBSOLETE:
1. no longer in general use; fallen into disuse: an obsolete expression.
2. of a discarded or outmoded type; out of date: an obsolete battleship.
3. (of a linguistic form) no longer in use, especially, out of use for at least the past century. Compare archaic.
4. effaced by wearing down or away.
5. Biology . imperfectly developed or rudimentary in comparison with the corresponding character in other individuals, as of the opposite sex or of a related species.
–verb (used with object)
6. to make obsolete by replacing with something newer or better; antiquate: Automation has obsoleted many factory workers.
SERIOUSLY....we need to move on

Just a few comments on editing. I noticed a few small errors that may seem irrelevant but which detract from a more polished look, undermining your credibility, which is already suspect by many critics. This doesn't help.

I align myself with the views put forth, but certain editing errors come across as unprofessional. I noticed at the end of "addendum", the number 5 repeated twice instead of a number 6 for "Create Critical Mass".

In this video, near the beginning, at about 2:20 you mention "We not only need to move forward but we have to." Need to and have to is the same thing. Perhaps "we not only need to move forward(in order to)...but we have to (in order to)

I'm a newbie for the website, though not for the films, so i don't know if this has been addressed, but the religious claims made in the first film need to be cited. The viewer needs to be able to check a credible source, independent of the zeitgeist movement, in order to verify this. For some of the claims, the only information I can find is on chatrooms that have received their information from your films.

cheer up. If we humans never learned anything, we'd still be banging rocks together. A favorite quote of mine is a riposte to pessimists, from an Ingmar Bergman movie. "Whichever way we turn, our arses are always behind us"; how true. OGT

I like the main motto from romance of the three kingdoms about the cycle of life : "The world under heaven, after a long period of division, tends to unite; after a long period of union, tends to divide"

agreed, but 'living in balance with nature' is a phrase that means little, if you consider. Animals have no choice, nor do most primitive human societies. To control population, even developed Chinese civilization was forced to practice infanticide. Medieval Europe did also for centuries, but kept it under cover.

Too few people in the ecology movement u/stand the vital & central importance of political democracy. That is the only mechanism we have for the fair & humane distribution of resources, to negotiate wants & needs. Throughout history, we have usually fallen for the worse alternatives - top-down imposed war, genocide, & starvation to eliminate 'surplus' people.

Minorities of aetherial powerbenders, like the Bilderbergers, are trying to send us down that bloody road again. They use shortages of money, food & energy to control us. Science has the answer to all that, but pro tem, we must seize political power to get our hands on the tools of science & technology.

Grassroots democracy is not some nice embellishment we can think about when we have ample in the way of necessities of life. No! It is primary, first & foremost, or nothing can change.

How to do it? Egypt has just given us a lesson. I think we in the rich north can do a whole lot better. OGT

Its not ignorance about the importance of democracy that undermines it but our inability to balance it with justice. For this to happen we must do away with competitive party politic.

John
- 02/13/2011 at 08:01

OGT:

I totally agree with your views, however, if we try to continue to solve our problems and the catastrophic future we now face within our monetary system, it's more than obvious that nothing will change, things are only going to get from bad to worse.

We can keep talking for years and decades about what we "could" do to crawl out of our mess, but if we continue on using money as the only means to make things happen, then no politics, corporate sharks nor regular people will be able to change anything.

We'll just keep competing with each other in order to survive, stepping on each others heads to avoid drowning, hunger, war, misery are guaranteed.

Have we ever wonder why the animals in this world live in such balance and harmony with nature?..Well, because they dont have to "trade" sell or buy anything, they simply have access to everything they need.

But humans?...NO!, we love to over complicate ourselves, we like to believe that we are better than "others" and that we can prove it by having more material possessions. We are sadly so uncivilized.

And even more sadly, we haven't yet realized that very soon technology will finally take our entire jobs, so if we don't move quickly and regain control by making the machines work FOR US!!, pretty soon all of us will be obsolete.

Science & technology can solve our material problems. But to unleash & apply these powers is a political issue. It will take a new revolution to remove the old, rotted forms of democracy. That is now way past its sell-by date. It is irrelevant, corrupted & obsolete.

Self-governing communities must be the answer, where citizens & government are pretty much the same people, no minority sector holding exclusive powers. Unless the grassroots take over the political system, we will tend to go round in circles, replacing one bunch of abusive turkeys with another the same.

Repeat: the base, fundamental issue is political, not material. The time has come to step up to a higher form of democracy, or we fall back into feudalism or worse. The crunch is approaching fast. OGT

Socialism, marxism, communism, all concepts based on a world with unlimited resources..lets wake up and live life how it really is...soon all people will be a mix of one another and maybe we won't hate each other soon. im a hybrid of two different races and see the world beyond what it is at times. We have to follow the natural laws of life and we can't be expected to kill off all competitors and learn to live with one another. war is not the answer..why don't we know this yet? makes me feel dumb as a human being

After watching the five-star documentary "Who Is Peter Joseph?" on TDF last night, and after being a fan of "Zeitgeist" for the past couple of years, I must admit I was very disappointed by PJ's oversimplified, utopian "solutions" to the problems he so well articulated in his other efforts. The man, like so many others (myself included) is much better at pointing out what the problems are than any realistic approach to solving them.

After pointing out in the early part of the documentary how technology and automation is such a large part of the problem, where does he get off suggesting that further technology and automation will help SOLVE those same problems? If anything, they could make them much worse.

And as much as I agree with PJ that much of society's problems can be laid at the root of all evil -- money -- I'm not sure his communist "solutions" are any solution at all.

My biggest problem of this whole documentary -- and, by default, the entire "Zeitgeist movemnet" -- is the (apparent) underlying notion that the "carrying capacity" of this planet is determined totally by ill-conceived patterns of overconsumption and distribution of wealth, and have (apparently) NOTHING to do with the even larger determinant of carrying capacity -- the total NUMBER of consumers looking for their piece of pie. To have a discussion of "carrying capacity" without mentioning OVERPOPULATION is akin to having a discussion on childhood obesity without mentioning McDonald's and candy bars.

How about THIS for a totally utopian notion of how to solve 99 percent of this civilization's, and this planet's, problems: reduce the population of this planet by 90 to 95 percent of our present unsustainable numbers, to get our population down to the 500 million to one billion where it stood for the first 200,000 years of our existence as a species... you know, when we lived in relative peace and harmony with our fellow human, while living lives of abundance in balance with our Mother. Until we literally "get back to the Garden" by getting our numbers down, there will be no garden to get back to, I don't care how many new gizmos tomorrow's technocrats come up with.

Two self-corrections please:
First, my last point should be #6 rather than #5.
Second, my spell-checker changed a word and I didn't catch it until after submitting my comment: "scientific principal" should have read "scientific principle". I was referring to a concept rather than a person in charge of science.

I appreciated the initial Zeitgeist movie for raising awareness of topics people really need to think about. As the sequels rolled out, the ideological drift was palpable. Reading through the comments (I admit I stopped halfway due to time limits) before I posted, I abandoned my initial approach for a few pithy observations.

1. Human nature hasn't changed since the Code of Hammurabi and the Epic of Gilgamesh. It's the same range of behaviors in China, Chechnya, Chicago and Chinle. Resources aren't the issue.

2. The idea that humans will exist without wealth springs from a poor understanding of wealth as well as a poor understanding of human nature. Whatever is prized by many becomes wealth and will be hoarded and coveted. Even where food is plentiful and the first three levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs are met, and where people are free to pursue self-actualization, the fourth level (achievement, status, responsibility, reputation) intervenes and will be pursued before people apply themselves to self-actualization. It is in pursuit of this fourth level that the Venus Project "utopia" will be destroyed, for it does not allow people to meet those needs.

3. Forcing everyone to live in identical dwellings would bring about massive revolt. Some people like little spaces and want to spend all their time outside; others like large spaces and want to spend all their time inside; some people like little spaces inside large spaces filled with amenities, some like a simple life in isolation and so on. If people have no choice, then one subset of the population has dictated to the rest how all will live. Some will be happy with the result, while most will be unhappy and work relentlessly to obtain what makes them happy.

4. Achem's Razor, your screen name may be a variant of your real name, but if you were intending it to refer to the scientific principal, your spelling is off... it's Occam's Razor, after William of Occam (1300-1349) who popularized the minimalist rejection of plurality. Perhaps you're linking yourself to the musical group... nevertheless your comments herein seem to aspire to minimalist perceptions.

5. Being neither a minimalist nor a socialist, I offer this regarding the Venus Project: Nature loves variety, and creates it everywhere. Whenever circumstances lead to monopoly, Nature destroys the status quo and variety reasserts itself. So also with the future envisioned in this latest installment of the Zeitgeist movement: sameness and homogeneity will bring ruin at Nature's hand, and variety will return.

5. Evidence of #2 above being true and relevant was offered by another commenter who researched and found that Roxanne in Venus, Florida is behind the Venus Project. By naming the entire project after her hometown, she has in essence given it her name and claimed it as her own work. The need for achievement, status, responsibility and reputation has already intervened at the outset of this project, and by its founder.

broad agreement here, but Zeitgeist has enuf good going for it to withstand a little tweaking in the theory department.

After watching the latest vid; I don't think the guiding spirits of ZG are too well-read in politics. They have grasped the technical & science aspects, but don't seem aware that these two are ultimately tools guided by politics. I.e., they must be subject to democratic control & direction. As you seem to agree, any expert elite must bow to the majority, after science & technology have been wrested from the hands of the bankers & corporations (a major political struggle in itself).

ZGeisters also seem unaware: top-down planning is vitally necessary, but is insufficient & hopeless w/out the bottom-up, grassroots democracy component. Human wants & needs can only be predicted to a limited degree. Finally, PEOPLE must decide them. OGT

Does environment create the behavior? That is, absent the environmental conditions would the behavior cease to exist? I’m not so sure. Poverty causes many issues that’s for sure. Prior to the modern banking system, which has since been exported pretty much all over the world, we still had large swaths of “have-nots” and but a few “haves”. I would like to agree that all people would be decent if their basic survival needs were met, but I’m not 100% sure on this. I would like to believe it’s true, desperately, but we’ve all met people who defy that reasoning and history also tells us otherwise. Looking back at where we’ve been is important if we are to move forward. Many different societal systems have come and gone and not all have been based around a monetary system, or if they were, the central banking/fractional reserve system was not used and they still had equally bad results. Why will Venus be any different? That’s not to say it’s not worth exploring other ideas, or even trying alternative methods, but there are a lot of contradictory statements being made if you research Venus further. One of my favorites is that logic is not applicable as we don’t live in a logical world. However, Venus will be run largely by computers which rely solely on logic. Nothing is perfect, but shouldn’t we strive for it? Mediocrity and apathy to it have long been a problem for this society IMHO. The, “oh well, there’s nothing else better” mantra is not a valid excuse for toeing any party line absolutely.

Blindly following a new religious zealot who calls science/logic his god does not fix our problems. This is what worries me most about the approach proposed. Science is the new religion. On these posts when TZM is questioned logically with valid questions about practical functionalities, followers of TZM hotly dismiss the questioner claiming they just don’t get it, and they resort to name-calling, saying people are stupid, negative, can’t see beyond what they already know, etc, etc. Does this seem familiar? Kind of seems like the fanatical Christians, or Jews, or any fanatical follower of any religion defending their faith. Lots of loud puffing, but not much real explanation. If this proposed solution is to be taken seriously a real, ongoing, productive debate needs to happen and that begins by being able to calmly explain your position when challenged and expanding on it. Not just seeking out those of similar inclination who already love and praise you. Seek those that will challenge and confront your ideals. If you want to enlighten you have to explain without condescension, accept that not all will agree and that this is valid, and that your own opinions/beliefs may change along the way. Heck, some might even be able to better your idea or have a better way period! Being challenged on our beliefs is a critical part of how we grow and learn. Not just trying to ram one way down everyone’s throats (hmm, like things already are and seemingly how Venus would also function). Let’s not trade one set of elitists for another. Remember they all claim to have society’s best interests at heart. FREEDOM is the way, the light, the path. Not Fresco’s idea of it for you or my idea of it for you, but freedom to pursue what YOU want, what you choose for yourself. This requires a far broader construct than Venus. I do applaud the widespread sharing of a vision/idea of a different way and the debate that springs from it – crucial if we are to move forward.

I agree the current fractional reserve system is completely unsustainable, creates additional problems, and will collapse under its own weight eventually. They have been desperately propping it up for years after all. There will likely be chaos when it does collapse; war and worsening scarcity are likely. Some will profit greatly from this, most of us will be much worse off. I think our real challenge is how to deal with this inevitable chaos and not to be reduced (morally/spiritually/whatever) by it. I hope real freedom will spring from it. Not just another system that we all must follow or be marginalized. That is something that’s not addressed in the proposed solution – it doesn’t seem to allow for anyone to go their own way. Don’t get me wrong it’s noble and worthy to try to ensure that everyone has enough food to eat and a warm place to sleep at night, but what if I don’t want to eat the food from the main farm? What if I want to grow my own? What if I don’t want an apartment in the round city? I want to build my own house from materials I deem worthy, in a location of my choosing. Would I be free to pursue my own simple survival needs in the way I see fit or am I forced into another system not of my choosing?

What really needs looking at immediately is the ever-expanding rights of corporations. This was not always the case. Once upon a time corporations were only allowed to exist for a short period of time for a specific purpose and were then disbanded. They had no rights as “people”. This changed some time ago and it’s been part of the slippery slope ever since. Also, allowing corporations to effectively patent and control life (whether human, plant, or animal) is another threat to our existence generally and is already happening. If you want to educate yourself learn about these topics. TDF has several good documentaries that can help on these subjects.

I love the idea behind this movement. Clearly this was thought out by intellectuals with bright minds and good intentions. However, how could this system ever be applied gradually? Or even at all? It would require that mankind was to be reborn again tomorrow with no notion of the past? Also it takes for granted that the intellect of the masses is superior to the will.

Enuf hippie, woolly, goodwill is not gonna get us anywhere, is our actions that will.

Zeitgeist is putting those ideas on the table for us to convert them in actions,...they are not going to take our hands and lead the way.

Is up to each and every single one of us to start rejecting our comfort zone and start doing all those things that will weak the current global empires, by taking away our entire support in every shape or form, according to our capabilities ans necessities.

It has to be a gradual change, cuz nothing will happen with violence or ¨agreements¨, there is no ¨from here¨ to the promise land, everything will come gradually.

Yes indeed, the whole thing sounds like a ¨hippie¨ new age dream, but maybe we should not dismiss an entire ideology simply because it remind us of something cheesy we´ve heard in the 60´s.
The change doesn´t depend on ¨Zeitgeisters¨ and their ¨plans¨, they are merely putting some ideas on the table, and it´s entirely up to us to start walking in that direction... or just walk behind the next sheep towards the cliff.

Zeitgeist is just an APROACH to start building another society, they dont have all the answers and no one does. Is the actual method whats important and not who applies it.

"We are all one" - pretty much what my old cheese used to say when arguing over the credit cards. This is true enuf at macro level, but as individuals we are all different - a conundrum that makes democratic self-government problematic. Hope Zeitgeisters have some good plans. They will need more than a haze of New Age goodwill. Getting rid of a bad system is only half the battle. OGT

Hahahahaha Dont Forget about the Power of Love people. We are all already one. We are just separated by the mind and different labels. Energy runs through everyone everywhere that is unrecognized by our five major senses. Lack of love will cause a majority of problems that already occur and will occur even with proper Resources accounted for. 80 percent of illness and Injuries start from biochemical changes within the body that come from stress or depression. Just like how adrenaline is Released through a trigger in the mind. We must also change the way people are taught about spirituality. We must learn to practice Unconditional or uncircumstantial Love. Just like it is in our nature to eat for nutrients it is in our nature to love. However it has seems we evolved or ways of getting food but devolved our ways of Loving. We must also all accept the fact that we physical world is created by thoughts and feelings. We are all connected just like string theory states, However there are multiple types of energies in parallel dimensions that we can not see.(gravity or magnetic pull being the easiest to imagine) I know this may sound hard for a simple or closed mind to understand or Imagine but we must start a Ripple effect of love, understanding and consciousness that creates momentum that is perpetual. We would not be here if our cells in our body did not work together and share equality. We must learn to do the same to evolve and create the next step in evolution for Universe.

'Equality' amongst so many variegated human personalities is an impossibility. The best we can hope for is equality of opportunity. Even that brute 19C principle of 'survival of the fittest' assumes an equal starting line for all, or else it don't work. The smartest & quickest will always tend to fare better, yes?

Where some resource is objectively finite, we have obvious problems. E/one strives for it that much harder. That's where a higher form of democracy comes in - if you like, it is a kind of 'meta' starting line. E/one discusses, then decides, then distributes accordingly. And no, I'm not suggesting that will be easy. Nothing worthwhile ever is.

But scarcity is not always as objective/finite as we tend to think. Science can conjure water from the deserts, if freed from the chains that our present undemocratic society wraps it in. Freeing science is another thing meta-democracy can do.

And note, science itself is not a democratic realm. It's the playground of a brilliant elite. But that tiny elite is winnowed from millions of candidates by the education system. In a true democracy, education has a starting line free to all, becoz human genius is a scarce resource we cannot waste. OGT

Oh interesting the site now moderates the word ”stupid” ... I was actually not putting anyone down either haha. I can understand tho ... there are too many flame war type comments and not enough positive dialogue. This moderation is reminding me to support and criticize arguments using only positive terminology ... lol hats off to you Vlatko for keeping us clean :)

I was being negative above about attempting to eliminate scarcity. The goal is all kinds of noble, to be sure. I just dont think it is realistic to solve the problem of scarcity that way. But hey ... if we can or if we do ... I wont be bitter about being wrong ... I will be happy.

Answering the question ”who gets the apartments with the best view and who takes the apartments with a lesser view” with ”all appartments will be built to have the same view” is an incredibly naive solution. I dont think there is any nicer way for me to put it. That is just one example of scarcity ... you simply cannot deal with them all in the same manner.

The problem is that desire is basically unlimited, while resources are finite. Resources being finite is up for debate, but compared to desires ... available resources will never meet them. Is the solution eliminating scarcity ... or is the solution eliminating excess desire. Probably both are necessary to a degree, but I believe we should assume the problem of scarcity will remain with us indefinitely. Assuming it is going to poof away from technology seems fairly optimistic and dangerous. At the point we eliminate scarcity we can say PHEW! instead of JEEZ FINALLY! And until then we can do the best with what we have to work with, continuing to improve it as best we can.

Is it stupid to try to progress the idea of socialism in more modern contexts ... not at all. Is it stupid to discuss and promote ideas that are WAYYYY ahead of their time ... no way. Kudos to any group who wants to make the world a better place.

You are just plain wrong. For starters, Jesus has done more to rescue people than you or any Venus project could ever begin to dream about. When He was here Jesus not only went on a mission helping poor and healing sick but then convinced a lot of people to be His 'body' after He was gone. They did just that and now there are tens of thousands of them who are going around doing things like: building hospitals, building schools, sending disaster relief, construction projects, hospices, you name it. They do not charge money but they pay for it themselves with money they earned.

And this thing about having as much money. You say that like it is some happenstance you wish for. In fact these charities have that money because their adherents work at jobs. Make things, produce things, save money. It is not just 'money' but the labour it represents. Dave fixed 50 cars and that $500 he donates to Catholic Orphanage fund is not just 'money' but his work. It was his labour and time and effort. If Venus Project people want to work all week, take the money they earned and go to Africa and build homes they can do it too. It just seems they do earn money too but choose rather to spend it on Comicon and fantasize about a Roddenbarry world and get the credit for their ideals without actually doing it?

Now what about these small armies of Christian orgs who are doing this work? Scraps? How dare you claim to be about good works or think you can tell anyone about helping humanity and then say something like that? Scraps no. In Zimbabwe a group is not giving anyone 'scraps' or 'band-aids' (though those things help too), but, they are purchasing land with 99 year leases and then building a school and hiring and training teachers to invest 10 years of education into the village children. This is not just giving a fish but teaching them how to fish.

Of course, temporary help is 'long term help' when it does things like SAVE THE PERSON FROM DYING. If you need to scoff at the 'foolishness' of providing some vitamin A supplements to 3rd world children so they don't die then maybe you should put your money where your mouth is and go there and build them your USS Enterprise home?

Most decent charities can run at about 85 to 15. That is considered a very good standard. It depends on the exact nature of the humanitarian efforts but 15-20% admin is a good number and most of the ones out there can get to that. Even 70-30 is fair enough. So what would you do differently? Why should I believe you can build computerized homes and gardens for better than 15% Administration and getting 85% to the person? You think Venus Project can do that? Why? It hasn't shown it can do anything but BE a charity asking for money.

As for this idea that no God will come to our rescue. Says who? You? You know who else said that no god would help them? Mao. Mao Zedong. He had them pull down statues of buddha and the virgin marry and then smash them in the streets. Then put his picture in their place. Then Mao and his socialist utopia went ahead and mass-murdered millions of people. In fact, I would be related to many of his murder victims had they not been starved to death. Anyways, I'm sure the Roddenberry Cult will do so much better with their project. Sure. I can just imagine.

Certainly, charitable organizations and ¨help fund raisers¨ have helped many people worldwide, built houses, water pumps, fed the hungry and so forth.

Unfortunately though this kind of charity actions are just little¨band-aids¨ in a dying and starving world.

In other words, ¨gathering foods¨ ¨goods and scraps¨ to a poor African village it certainly helps them for a few days, BUT that is not going to fix their lives in the long run, that is not going to give them shelter, jobs, clothing, education and certainly not going to fix their diseases, crime rates, corruption and so forth.

If the Zeitgeist Movement or the Venus project were as rich as the catholic church or other religions, they would probably also raise funds to help people around, but again these kind of actions only benefit random poor communities in a random country for just a couple of days if not hours.

Charity organizations in the other hand, get incredibly rich with the contributions they receive, compared to the contributions they provide, which in all cases the amount they give to the poor is incredibly smaller to the huge amount of resources they obtain out of it. Organizations ARE and will ALWAYS be about money and profit my friend, make no mistake about it.

The Venus Project, focuses on changing the ENTIRE CURRENT SYSTEM, and not just on providing ¨every now and then¨ a few ¨band-aids¨ to the ever increasing poor masses.

The rich elites, the powerful corporate sharks wont come to the rescue for anybody but themselves, simply because this system is based on the selfish idea of ¨everybody for themselves¨.

Neither, God, Mohatma, Chrisna, Jesus, Buda, Jehova or the other million gods are coming to our rescue as well.

I know Mother Teresa fed and cared for a lot of people. I know the Priest Mendel is the 'father' of modern genetics and that many denominations built hospitals to get vaccines into people.
because it was their religious belief and what they thought Jesus instructed them to do.

Hey, before that was possible I know the modern scientific method as we know it today comes from Christian monks and clergy who developed and perfected it and looked for utility in society, invented universities for it and so on.

I know that there are thousands of Christian orgs all over the place putting drinking wells, schools and whatever else into desperate regions for zero money.
Hey.. a group of these Christian doctors and nurses just got murdered by Taliban for it.

Anyways,
Here is what I DONT KNOW or never heard of yet - Zeitgeist movement people doing a damn thing to help anyone like that?
Maybe they did but I suspect most sit at home watching Star Trek and online youtube atheist videos imagining they are Mr.Spock yet dreaming how the world would be if they didn't have their social status problems in life.

What have these activists ever done?
Because if they can't go build some homes in Liberia out of their own pockets then should we really invest in this Utopian idea on any larger scale?

Look, I dont think you really want to "move on" on this thread, you seem to only want to refute ZM ( which is ok if u dont like it)

BUT, if you just can't understand that we need to drastically change our crazy path to our destruction as a society (with or without ZM ideas), then we could talk for an eternity and things will only get worse and worse with corruption, crime, war and so forth.

Nothing is going to change if the monetary system continues to be our only way to do things in this planet. This exchange mechanism has grown to be the greatest enslavement system of all time.

Nobody says it would be easy to abolish money, actually it will be very complicated, but eventually we can overcome the need for it to finally release ourselves from the chains of greed and slavery and actually start to "move on".

Otherwise there is no future at all.

"There is no need to bite the hand of the puppet master that manipulates us, we just need to get rid off the chains around our necks"

@John
Care to add any other completely obtuse commentary before the mute button is hit? I think we can all assume this is OGT in disguise who can't take a small critique... or perhaps you just enjoy the inane.

"The above looks rather incoherent, a bit like one of those entries in the Monty Python competition,"

Your comment is directly related to what he said, not the 10 minutes. The comment was in fact interesting and to the point. If you wanted to be critical of the 10 minutes, you should have stuck to that.

Old Git Tom:
My understanding of history comes from what we call 'real sources' (as opposed to online nonsense) and yes I do travel the world visiting museums, ancient sites, taking the tours with historians (actual PHD bearing ones).

Now here I was just letting the Utopian people know the bad news. Even IF they ever achieved this thing it would only be a matter of time before one sector would inevitably pull a 'Rome' and stomp Greece and make the other 75% slaves.
Sorry.
This has happened thousands of times over in history so I am not believing 'this time' would be different.

You should bothered to read this and if you can't flex for a writing style different than your 'captain spock/data' impersonation then how are you going to help this 'movement' accept all the different types in the world?

I work with oil companies and Haliburton is a major employer in my area. nobody is saying they are some saintly charity organization,
but,
they have invested a tremendous amount of research in energy efficiency and including work on geothermal heating and wind energy.
not to mention providing the oil energy it takes to make those windmills, solar panels and geothermal equipment.
Keep in mind - Haliburton would LOVE to make billions selling new technology. Love it!

And again - crime rates (which itself can mean different things yes) but crime rates, immorality (depends what you think I guess) and actual health are not necessary as tied to monetary gain as you think.
Example:
Obesity was never a problem with our native peoples. Diabetes unheard of. Old photos show 'ripped' slim native peoples.
When some fairly lucrative social schemes were in full effect by the 70s and 80s they were wealthy enough that nobody had to work or worry about food. Actually they can even be paid money (depending on the scheme) to actually grow and hunt and fish their traditional diets. They have full access to universal healthcare.
Now obesity and diabetes, heart attacks and all manner of illnesses plague them.

Now this might be better than people who once starved to death (or is it?) but it demonstrates that wealth or poverty isn't this clear thing the video wants us to presume.

But look, even things like the very opening declaration make this idea senseless:
The movement does not recognize states, religions, creeds, classes?
Oh really?
Well they sure as hell will recognize YOU! Then decide what they want to do about it. What the 'states, religions and creeds' recognize is all that really even matters lol

So yeah.. this is all good and well to want to carry out the scriptures of your prophet John (Imagine lyrics by J. Lennon) and to make a video depicting it,
but,
unfortunately, unless there is some dramatic change in human nature this Star Trek fantasy park can only happen for a group of people with enough capital to buy their own theme park.
Call it 'Brave New World' and fund it with a Reality Show contract that will eventually record the inevitable infighting and breakdown.

Sorry man.. there are a lot of things I wish were true or agree with in principle.
It just can't happen.

no ad hominem; Justin said he commented after 10 minutes of docu-watching, which is why his response was lacking.

Justin,

cripes, your history sounds like it comes from Ferris Bueller! But just two major gaffes:

1/ The energy corps do indeed spend much time & money suppressing cheap energy alternatives. You & many others do not know about it.

2/ Research shows very clearly, globally - the wider the gap between richest & poorest in a society, the worse are the levels of a whole range of problems, from crime to obesity. Inequality is bad for you. Sorry all you conservative/righties/teabaggers out there (no I'm not). Again, the pols & media moguls know this, just most people do not. Why else should the richest sector own the mass media?

But Justin, you do have some valid points, if you can only put your ideas in better order. Be fair, if you can't be bothered, why should the reader? OGT

Ugh. Painful. Sorry I had to fast-forward (but keep reading) because that was just excruciating. I mean it's wonderful to just imagine some fantastical utopia but please be serious and maybe check to make sure (whatever) hasn't already been done before or if what one is saying is clearly untrue.

- People do not think science is some cold heartless 'thing' which we are some how neglecting. A huge part of our society is now constantly working on science and technology which people love and support and contribute to and most definitely want the best of the best to discover cures or advancements.

- Not long ago (in my region) there most definitely was a non-monetary system and add to that the people lived with and in nature near seamlessly with virtually zero negative effect on the environment.
At this time there certainly were happy peaceful peoples and then there were HORRIFYING GENOCIDES, good old murders, pillaging, savage warfare etc etc.

- There was once a society called 'Greece' which in its finest days achieved what might be the closest thing to this sort of 'self perpetuating system' where you nearly had most people never even needing to work. So they traded and busied themselves in the arts and philosophy. Great! (just forget the slave labour thing for the sake of this).
OK!
Yes, well here is the problem. A section of them (known as Romans) were thinking this was great too. Then they decided that all they needed to do was get together, assign each other jobs and careers, work all day, mine resources, make enough weapons and decided they could then get ALL the stuff instead of just their quarter of the 'Venus Community'. So they did that.
Stomped the other 3/4s (just using the fraction for the idea of this) and stomped Greece and called it Rome. Then they got all the great homes, food and even MORE slave labour for themselves.
(btw.. there could be 1000+ similar examples)

- Haliburton and 'big oil' doesn't sit around trying to find ways to avoid cheap energy. They actually invest heavily into energy research and this includes not only perfectly efficiency of gas and oil extraction but of alternatives but realistically (at this time) a lot of these are very inefficient compared to oil. The good news is we still have massive amounts of oil to extract and burn.
You know.. to do things like keep people from freezing to death, power lights in hospitals or allow people to make documentaries on their home computer.

- Contrary to this guys bizarre opinions, crime rates can be very low in times of economic hardship in monetary societies and for example the USA 'Great Depression' had relatively LOW crime rates or for another example a very high crime rate spike around the 70s despite being (relatively speaking) a very wealthy country.

- Watching a doc on a USA gang who became so wealthy they describe, in effect, no longer being aware of money when it was so plentiful and unlimited the thought of 'needing it' or even being 'greedy' was lost on them when you didn't have any lack to 'greed for'. They had more cars, jewels and mansions that it was simply a 'non-issue' for desiring anything. Did their crime rate go down? Not for long. In short time they were killing each other over a dirty look and degenerated into violent thugs, backstabbing and seemingly for 'fun', traitors, rapes and murder you name it.

Anyways.. I guess this is all interesting to think about but of course the Zeitgeist thing will never happen so I suppose no need to really worry about it.

My post makes perfect sense but has poor sentence structure but I will agree with you I ought to force myself through more than just 10 minutes.
I'm not sure 100 minutes of fail is better than 10 but okay I will give it another attempt.

maybe if you can spare more than ten minutes of yout time, you could give us your considered analysis, rather than a quick verbal spurt? The above looks rather incoherent, a bit like one of those entries in the Monty Python competition, 'Summarise the Life & Works of Marcel Proust in 30 Seconds'. OGT

I can't say much because after just 10 minutes there was so many instances of plain wrong, plain inaccurate, baseless assumptions I could not go on. I don't even know what gnostic anti-theist nonsense disguised as 'intellectual analysis' may or may not have come later (going by some quotes here),
but,
I would say the first ten minutes is full of fail and for example we HAVE HAD long periods of time where certain societies built almost indestructible housing requiring nearly no upkeep or 'cyclical turnover' and (relative to their times) economies did well (or bad) or excellent. Often quite well. They maintained monetary systems just fine.
I've stayed in some of these houses.

That is the problem with this militant gaya-worship atheist whatever-the-hell gnostic zeitgeist 'documentary' in that it just 'drops in' baseless nuggets 'as if' we knew this or that nugget to be a 'fact'. Wrong.

And no we are not even near the verge of permanently doing anything to the environment. We couldn't stop mass forest fires nearly burning down Russia or the consequent massive reforestation that will take place. A single hurricane will show you how insignificant we are.
The 'massive gulf spill' was a drop in an ocean that corrected that instantly.

Anyways.. a lot of comment for the first 10 minutes rofl.. but hey.. maybe the rest of this is better?

we agree on much. And yes, there is no need for us to get doomy about even the negative part of 'human nature'. That can be changed, since a great part of it is socially learned. A saner social environment will produced better people, or rather, a more stable 'global brain'.

Positively, we have always had a great gift for group cooperation, & for behavioral adaptation. Time to put them to better use than trying to run the atrocious & ridiculous mess of brute capitalism! OGT

I guess there's this half-truth spread about darwin's "survival of the fittest" approach to evolution. We are strongest when we cooperate, and it's taking us a long time to figure that out. I see that capitalism is a by-product of our own fallacies, but in turn, it has helped perpetuate the cycle and many of us now our by-products of the capitalist system. It's a vicious cycle.

By no means am I excusing human behaviour when I explain its benevolence. I just think too many people fall into despair when they feel that humans are "naturally" self-destructive and that there is no hope for change when its "built into" our DNA. The first step is to empower people and let them know that it is within them to change, and that they are not completely subject to "natural" tendancies as history would suggest. People have to know that there is good within them before they can actualize it. From there, we CAN change our society through action and an understanding of the possibilities for human behaviour and sociey.

Basically, it's not so much that by removing capitalism, we will achieve peace and harmony, but that we cannot hope to achieve peace and harmony within a capitalist society. Both people and the society we create must co-change and co-exist.

“We have to be completely transparent in our decision-making process. Have you watched the film “Us Now” here on TDF? The advent of the internet is our greatest opportunity to reconstruct how we conduct business and governance amongst ourselves. This will break down the pyramid hierarchies of today and move us towards a more equal and balanced society.”

But –

“I don’t believe we are as self-destructive as you may think. I think that we are actually more benevolent by nature, so much so, that we are naive and gullible. We’ve trusted higher “authorities” to take care of things and have willingly submitted to their demands without question.”

Now I don’t ‘believe’, except insofar as the evidence shows. And history is unambiguous. The less history you know, the more you can give credit to human benevolence! The eternal tragedy is, humans are prone to use solidarity for positive & negative purposes, as you indeed suggest. No human group is more united in fraternal bonding & altruism than the soldiers’ ‘band of brothers’, who go out to kill others - non-brothers.

My point again, we are an unstable species, marked out by great skills in cooperation, but also mutual competition & destruction.

A major problem is our unthinking dependence on Darwinian materialism. That insists that evolution is thru the individual. In contradiction, modern research indicates that homo sapiens sapiens is very much a SOCIAL creature. Hence crude Darwinism supports the neo-Hobbesian principle of each individual being in pitiless competition with every other isolated individual. Of course, that is extremely congenial to the apologists for the social perversions of capitalism, & capitalist economics. It is also fundamentally unscientific & false.

The pathological amongst us are (agreed) a minority, but they do tend to rise to positions of disproportianate power & influence. That they have so much tacit/passive support from the psychologically healthy majority is part of the human genetic inheritance.

It is futile, & dangerous, to excuse human failings by laying all blame on capitalism. Capitalism is a symptom, a product of the innate human incapacity to rule its affairs wisely. But knowing this gives the possibility of changing everything.

I believe we are agreed. We have to be completely transparent in our decision-making process. Have you watched the film "Us Now" here on TDF? The advent of the internet is our greatest opportunity to reconstruct how we conduct business and governance amongst ourselves. This will break down the pyramid hierarchies of today and move us towards a more equal and balanced society.

However, I don't believe we are as self-destructive as you may think. I think that we are actually more benevolent by nature, so much so, that we are naive and gullible. We've trusted higher "authorities" to take care of things and have willingly submitted to their demands without question. As things got worse through history, we continued to look to our masters/figure heads for a better way, and every time, they pull us into another one of their pyramid-schemes. Our misbehaviors of the past and present are a result of our discontent with the system. Like someone who was madly in love with someone, only to find they were using them for personal gain. Don't take this as an absolute statement. I only bring this up to show the better side of humanity. We aren't all that bad.

This reminds me. I watched this documentary on A&E or something a long time ago called Most Evil. It was trying to answer the question: "Can good people do terrible things?" And the results are quite amazing. In a group setting, where all but the test subject are actors told to answer the simple questions incorrectly, They are asked to answer which line was the longest or shortest (multiple choice). At the beginning, the test subject would answer correctly, but after a while, he/she doubted him/herself after seeing the others answer differently. Eventually, to conform, the test subject followed the group. Another experiment placed an actor in an electric chair (fake) and the subject was instructed to turn the dial which increased the voltage. The subject continued even when he could see he was "killing" the guy in the chair.

I guess my point is, we aren't so much self-destructive, greedy, and all that bad stuff, but we are actually genuinely good people who are conforming to society and following orders. I believe only a very small percentage of us are genuinely "evil."

we agree, I think then, on the need for a wired-up democracy involving hands-on self government.

The mark of any serious or significant program is in treating how we make the revolutionary step from our present mess to the better society - the transitional phase. That's the second tricky bit. If we accomplish the first great task of overthrowing finance capitalism (not simple marketing of produce, commodities, etc.), IMHO we must fully understand that it is not sufficient to depend on an innate, benevolent 'human nature'.

The Russian revolution ended Russian capitalism, but eventually killed, maybe, 100 million Russians. Becoz our species is not benevolent, unless we program what benevolence we do have into our social structures.

Your timescale is skewed, I think. Homo sapiens sapiens only emerged some 70K years back, from a very tiny group. Materialists have very little grasp of the significance of this, since HSS is so very similar physically to its predecessors. Don't let that fool you. The key difference was in our psychology, our software, not the material meat & bones.

'We' were distinct in our aggressive expansionism. That is why we quite rapidly grew in numbers to settled agriculture, then wars for ever-scarcer farmland. Those wars go back to the bronze age - caused by exponential increase in numbers & territorial expansionism (connected).

Capitalism is/was simply an extension of atavistic, biological blitzkrieg by other means.

Screw the Walt Disney school of 'living in harmony'. I'm afraid that is self-flattering & sentimental nonsense. The record shows we have been killing animals & one-another for milennia, becoz we are unique, an unstable mixture of cooperative & competitive talents. We have to nurture the latter now, to survive.

It seems clear to me (& few others!) that the prevailing ethos of Darwinian materialism leaves us wide open to dangerous misunderstanding. Unique amongst animals, we practise organized, mass warfare, complete with genocides. Anthropology & biology are stumped for an explanation of such non-survival behavior. It is also dangerously facile to blame this on capitalism, since it long pre-dates capitalism.

We originally made a psychological trade-off. We exchanged the stability of mere survival for the allure of aggressive expansionism.

A hint of this mechanism is from psychology. Latest thinking has identified a 5% incidence of psychopathy in us. That is a genetic disorder, not a mental affliction of the normal kind. It is untreatable, since it is 'natural'. Now, what role do you think these pitiless 'Alphas' have played in human history?

If you think we 'normals' hate the paths, think again. 40% of Russians still admire Joe Stalin, the great butcher & torturer.

The seeds of human self-destruction are in our genes, but knowing that can change everything (with luck). So good luck! OGT

You are very right in talking about grassroots democracy. But don't you see that such a system goes against capitalism? This Zeitgeist Movement is just the solution. It advocates everything you have just explained - "It can provide a neural network for a global human brain, where sane survive & thrive strategies are followed, rather than the chaos of present human stupidity."

I agree that you can't simply remove capitalism and hope for the best, but a solution that is well thought out and agreed upon via the "global brain" needs to replace our current social structure. It is a ground-up movement, that starts with the people and society will be a product of our actions rather than our actions being a product of society.

To add to your quote - "Self-destructive dynamics have been with humanity since we first marched out of Africa" is a narrow look at humanity, for we've only been so destructive and capitalistic in the last 10,000 years. Humanity has been harmonious with nature until the agricultural revolution. From this point, we've slipped deeper and deeper into a materialistic perspective, never realizing that agriculture and technologies to follow, were supposed to free us from drudgery and progress us as a species. Instead, we continue to toil away, expanding and turning humans into slaves for the wealthy few. With the advent of money and trade, the plague of capitalism spread across the globe, where entire civilizations were destroyed for land and resources that the natives were more than willing to share.

Basically, out of the last 200,000 years, it only took a mere 5% of our existence to corrupt ourselves and turn the planet into a garbage dump. And out of that 5%, it's only within the last 5-10% That we began doing the real damage to ourselves and the planet. So to say we've always been capitalistic is a misconception. If you put human existence on a 24 hour clock, we've done this damage within the last 7 minutes of the day. I consider this a lesson for humanity, a harsh one at that, but one that we are more than capable of learning from and taking responsibility for. A Resource-based Economy seems to be a very radical, but very real solution. It's gonna take the contribution of many people before it can take shape, which is why I advocate the movement and want people to be part of the solution rather than wait for the solution to come.

capitalism is not the ultimate problem, since we know human fallibility pre-dates & post-dates it. Self-destructive dynamics have been with humanity since we first marched out of Africa. Our species has always been ruthlessly expansionist. We early rubbed out the woolly mammoth, etc., with stone weapons. Later civilizations used up most of the forests & resources of the Mediteranean basin & Europe. Cutting down the forests of N America was just a continuation.

And getting rid of capitalism in Russia in 1919 was surely a disaster. Humanity did not ‘naturally’ improve, it in fact got far worse – an awful lesson we must heed.

So anti-capitalism alone offers no fundamental solution. More: no ‘isms’, no schemas of economic redistribution, will give us magical remedies. Only a more sophisticated control system of grassroots democracy can (possibly!) do that. In effect, thru a revolution for direct democracy, our whole species would make an evolutionary, adaptational leap forward for survival.

Paradoxically, the unpopularity of much of the ecology movement with Joe Public is in its apparent emphasis on material denial – we must cut down on consuming this, that, or the other wasteful stuff or practice. Fair enuf, but the revolutionary leap forward would unleash science & technology to give a higher quality of life without the environmental destruction.

Eg., it has been discovered that controlled bacterial processes can produce materials from steel to oil. Utopia!!! Ah, but there is not a hope in hell for these advances to be actualized under our present system of political control by a tiny minority of banking psychopaths. Desktop democracy can do this. It can provide a neural network for a global human brain, where sane survive & thrive strategies are followed, rather than the chaos of present human stupidity.

BUT, macro control must be in the hands of humanity. No elite of technocrats can do this. OGT

You're right about expanding to the point of no return, but I would have to disagree with stating "capitalism" is not the source of the problem.

You said "As the song said, we paved paradise, & put up a parking lot." - but I would add to that with a question. Why did we pave a parking lot in the first place? - Money/profit. For sake of profit (capitalism), we act beyond rationality and morality because it is a means of survival. So it is not "human weakness/stupidity" that pops up out of nowhere to destroy our civilization. It's our exceptional ability to adapt to a system that rewards greed. You talk about the debt/money crisis as if it's some natural force/beast that must be tamed, but what you may not realize, is that capitalism is a human creation, and not something that exists in nature. Capitalism is pure mathematics, without any regard for the well-being of the community or the planet. It is a function that serves only to increase profit. So how can you stop such a machine? It's sole purpose is profit, and no amount of regulation will stop it from doing what it was designed to do. We have to dismantle this machine and replace it with something more advanced, user friendly, and energy efficient.

agreed! Capitalism as a system depends on expansion. Today's debts are to be paid off in some prosperous future. But we never get there. The public debt to the banks just gets bigger & bigger.

Trouble is, now the expansion of capitalism & its huge future debts have come up hard against the physical limits of the planet. The whole world has become a market, & there are no more markets to expand to.

Result? Capitalism is now cutting up & selling the last resource, our FUTURE, to pay debts now.

We either domesticate & tame this beast with democracy, or it will destroy us. But the ultimate enemy is not 'capitalism', it is human weakness/stupidity. As the song said, we paved paradise, & put up a parking lot. OGT

How is The Zeitgeist Movement not productive? What is productive to you? More law, regulation, police, guns, more votes, a better political cabinet, more money? It's not productive to run into a burning building wanting to save people, without understanding the situation. Also, you can't fight fire with fire. You have to understand the elements that are required to create fire, and extinguish at least one of those elements. In the Zeitgeist Movement, money is one of those key elements.

To equate The Zeitgeist Movement to communism is just plain ignorant. There are some similarities, but communism as it stands, should be spelled with a capital "C," for that definition declares all resources property of the state rather than the community. Also, Communism never addressed the problems with money or government intervention.

Quit using terms and phrases that are heavily open to misinterpretation, especially from all the capitalist propaganda. Utopia, communism, socialism, and especially "reality." What IS reality? Reality at one time was that the earth was flat, or that nothing heavier than water or air could float or fly. "Reality" is present-minded thinking with no aspirations for the future. You get nowhere, staying grounded, staring at your feet, unaware of the road that lies ahead, or even of the train headed your way. You should learn from the past, understand your present situation, and look to the future and see the possibilities.

Oh, and how does this make sense? "Just because we can paint a pretty picture of something doesn’t mean it’s pretty." It's not about observing society and making it into a "pretty" picture. To do so is to paint an illusion of reality, or to paint something in your image, how you see it. Making something look nicer doesn't solve the problem, nor does making it look ugly. It's simply willful ignorance and an unwillingness to face the problems of today. There's no time for pretty pictures, it's time to draw what we see in full accuracy. That was the point of my previous observation metaphor. You're constantly putting yourself into the picture, whether it be of our current state of affairs, or the resource-based economy. You'll never understand how the body works if you keep painting pictures that are disproportionate. I see The Zeitgeist Movement for what it is, and my drawing is complete, proportional, and accurate to every detail. The picture many of you seem to draw looks like a child's drawing, with lack of understanding and observation. You point at your picture and say, "See!? Look at this Zeitgeist Movement. It looks funny. Like something out of a fairy tale. This is an impossibility." When I draw what I see (and not what I think), it is accurate to reality, and seeing it as a possibility is much easier when it is rendered properly.

If you can't see that the system we have today creates the "corrupt" people of our time, then you are another rat in the maze, unable to see the whole game. The system of capitalism is exactly that of a game of Monopoly. In the end, there will be only one winner, while everyone else is left bankrupt. Life is NOT a game and should not be treated as such. How can anyone expect to get ahead in a game designed for one ultimate winner? How can you expect people to behave nice in a game that rewards deception and greed? The solution for this game is not to play anymore. Design a new game that is not based on winners and losers.

You summed that up pretty well. It feels good to be reassured that not everyone is so pessimistic and have such a narrow view of reality. I try to inspire change, but people seem all too comfortable with where they are, even when life is less than satisfactory.

The way I see it, I could never live comfortably knowing that a billion people are starving, and another two billion are either homeless, underemployed, or underpaid. Why should they suffer at my expense? I just hope people who are privileged to live in first world nations can see this horrendous inequality. It's our responsibility, as the privileged few, to help the less fortunate. By this, I don't mean simply give them money or a few meals to live of of, I mean that we have to bring everyone up to a standard of living that we all deserve. No one deserves to live cold with empty bellies.

The Zeitgeist movement is the most progressive action anyone has ever attempted. If there's a better solution out there, I am sure the Zeitgeist movement would welcome it.

Unfortunately, I must waste my time and energy with people who disagree, but to me, it's not a waste. If we can't convince enough people that there is prosperity beyond the horizon, then we all will perish. We need support for the benefit of all humanity and the planet. This movement has to be agreed upon and cannot be forced like communism of the past. I am not sure how to go about deprogramming the brainwashed people of today, but I figure that logic, science, and a few metaphors might help. I guess it's not as easy as giving someone the choice to take the blue or the red pill. It would seem as though many have already chosen the blue pill, though.

Spot on man, I couldn´t agree more on everything you said, some people often associate new ideas and dismiss them according to their own life experiences, so they block themselves and is useless to engage with them in a non childish way.

People who have some economic and regional advantages such as those living in first world countries, will more commonly disagree with the ZM ideas, because they havent had to struggle with the huge atrocities that the first world countries have caused to the third world population.

Big corporations, such as banks, mainstream media, religious corporations etc, are not interested in any kind of change, because this system works perfectly for them by maintaining control and huge profits, regardless of need, efficiency or sustaintability.

People like this, with such poor disposition to improve humanity will keep on labeling this kind of movements as ¨crazy¨utopias, or comunists or socialists, because its easier to label them, so they dont have to think to much.

Some say, ¨Oh capitalism isnt bad¨, we can just get rid off the bad apples and live happily ever after.

But no, you cannot fix a system that is inherently corrupted, simply because corruption is exactly what this system rewards, and the other systems such as communism or socialism also fail because of the same thing.

So yes Alex, keep up the good work and dont waste your time and energy with people who has no disposition towards ZM.

That’s a very nice speech. It reminds me of those folks who naively ask ‘why can’t we all just get along’ … sweet yes, but not productive. If you can see so clearly as an artist, I question why you can’t see clearly what society is. You say ‘include the super minds and rich’, yet fail to see that they are supporting eugenics programs to kill off the population. You say it is ‘our’ plan, yet fail to see that most people don’t want a communist derived dystopia.

Yes, I did use a label. But to describe it as such is no different or worse than describing you as an artist. Freedom isn’t bad, capitalism isn’t bad. The system is bad. Technically the system isn’t bad, the people are corrupt. So now, you have to get rid of all the corrupt people. At some point you’re going to have to realize that there won’t be anybody left to create the society you dream of.

I like your speech and high ideals, but you have to face reality. As an artist you should know that we can both draw the same thing, draw it differently and both be right so I trust you will understand that while I don’t see this issue as you, I am not necessarily wrong.

Just because we can paint a pretty picture of something doesn’t mean it’s pretty.

Some great, some not so great debates here. I've posted quite a bit on the Rise and Fall of Socialism page, advocating The Zeitgeist Movement towards a resource-based economy, and I know how difficult it can be to get your point across. This would have to be due to the condition of human perspective. We all have unique personal experiences, and it would seem that we all are projecting our own hopes and fears into society and any possibility for a change in our society.

What I've learned, as an artist, is to observe without projecting yourself into the subject matter. You know how, when you're a kid, you draw a circle for a head and two dots for eyes, etc... to make a face and all limbs are disproportionate? That's because we draw in symbols, projecting our own ideas of what we are trying to draw, without truly observing the subject to see that the head is not half the size of our bodies. When I was learning advanced art techniques, we look at the entirety of the subject, and begin by establishing proportion. From there, observe negative space and see how it interacts with your subject. The form takes shape rather quickly, and the details are worked out much easier this way than if you were to begin by picking a tiny part of the subject and working from there.

What I am trying to convey here, is that, to grasp any subject matter, you must learn to disassociate yourself from the subject. Draw what you see and not what you think you see. Also, don't pick on all the little details, as the details are better worked out after a balanced and proportional understanding is established. I see a lot of bickering and name calling here, just better worded than schoolyard jargon. "You're a communist/socialist," "It's human nature so it's inevitable," "What you gonna do about this," etc...

If you want to debate the issues, understand the material first. Don't jump in, thinking you know all the details, and could simply "draw" the subject from memory, because you have it all figured out. Take the time to be objective and observant of what's going on and what the Zeitgeist movement proposes. As far as I'm concerned, there really is not debate because they do spell things out for you pretty clearly. There's this idea that people have been indoctrinated to believe about "human nature" and "capitalism versus socialism" that makes many of you feel as though you are all experts on money, government policy, and sociology.

My point is, we get nowhere when we can't get together to create solutions. Instead we waste our breath pointing out the flaws when we should be finding solutions. Can we all agree that our current system is unsustainable? Can we all agree that we have some of the most brilliant minds of our time at our disposal? Then why can't we agree, that it is in our best interests to gather the brightest minds (not to exclude us regular folk) to formulate an entire system that is designed with efficiency, taking into account social, environmental, and technological understanding? The Zeitgeist Movement isn't about doing it THEIR WAY, but doing things OUR WAY. A way that benefits us all, including the rich and super rich. Let's put aside the hate and anger towards our differences, forgive the wrongs of the past, and let's build a future together.

first, democracy made America great. From this flowed the muscular capitalism & industrialism. Trouble is, US democracy has been subverted by Wall Street. In parallel, by consequence, capitalism has degenerated into parasitic usury - using pure money-power to extort yet more money from the population. This is a vicious, self-defeating spiral into national collapse.

If you look at how 'free market' policies work globally, you will see absence of freedom. The IMF leads what is actually a class war of the super-rich against wage jocks. We are seeing the emergence of corporatism, the merging of government & big business, which is also called fascism.

If you can go beyond neo-con propaganda masquerading as economics, read Keynes. You will discover he was pro-capitalism, not anti. OGT

The Movement and the vast majority of the comments here fail to note that Capitalism and the free market created the USA as the example for the world. No other country has as much or can produce as much due to man's willingness and desire to succeed and help others to succeed. It is the world's undoing that it cannot keep pace simply by wishing it could and then being envious after failing to apply free market principles in it economies. Keynsian theory sucks. Collectivism is failure just waiting to run out of cash.

thanks; Kjerkegaard's formulation is good as far as it goes. Yet truth does not rest as stasis, it is dynamic & ever-changing. Truth grows stronger as it develops in the discussions & exchanges between minority & majority.

When truth enters the minds of the majority, that's it, that is a revolution, & the world changes - as with the American Revolution. Materialists always look in vain for some substantive cause. The universe is ultimately ideas, mind. These shape matter, stuff, meat & potatoes. OGT

Truth always rests with the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion -- and who, therefore, in the next instant (when it is evident that the minority is the stronger) assume its opinion ... while Truth again reverts to a new minority. Soren Kierkegaard

Just noticed a typo from a prior post. I meant Socrates was 2.5 thousand years ago not 2. I don't know how I didn't catch that, and I also overlooked your rebuttal stating his birth date. My face is pretty red right now lol.

"Picking apart this idea is in of itself a solution through prevention of a potentially civilization crushing idea."

Sound point: discussion is an absolutely essential part of any solution. But as for destroying civilization, that's well advanced already, thanks to our present maniacal system.

The ecological & economic crises are linked. Hungry industrial capitalism has used up all the easy to access resources. It has expanded to make the whole world its market. There is nowhere else to expand!

The last raw resource is the future. That is what is being burned up now, OUR future. If you don't need millions of factory hands any more, you cut the social security payments & let them starve. If you only need a few highly-educated technocrats for production purposes, you slash the education budget.

The national debt of the USA has now got so big, it must collapse the whole economy. But the boys & girls on Wall Street don't care. They don't care if civilization collapses. I expect they are thinking of doing a Pol Pot - wipe everybody else out, then start all over again from Year Zero. OGT

I think everyone who chooses to pick apart the Zeitgeist Movement and Venus Project with out offering positive solutions for societies problems is being counter productive. Of course there are problems. But I haven't heard of any other organisations who so thoroughly address all of modern societies problems while offering a feasible way forward for human kind. Plus, as the presentation explains how can any of us raised in a monetary society fully comprehend this proposed system? We can't. All we can do is offer useful suggestions and become part of the solution. I don't believe Peter Joseph and Jaques Fresco or anyone else involved in the Venus Project are interested in world domination or money or power. I believe like me they are saddened by the state of the world and the difficulty (near impossibility) to impose any real changes. And they are offering solutions. And if you have any better solutions I'm sure they would like to hear them and incorporate them into our future model of society.

sorry to go on! But going back to some better age/model is not an option. The characteristic of our days is corruption, rot, decay & dissolution of old forms. This is part the normal workings of history, but also partly deliberate. The global bankers use crisis & decay as weapons, to increase fear & uncertainty.

Crisis capitalism is consciously fostered. If we do not understand what is going on, & what is likely to happen, we are so many brainless sheep running round bleating our fears & complaints. OGT

the old social-democrat model of Europe was far in advance of the US/UK market forces rubbish. It worked very well for over 50 stable years. It is being destroyed by the increasingly centralized banks, precisely to introduce worse things, not better.

'The masses' are not identifiable, they are anonymous, & more powerless by the day. Power in the EU is in the hands of the central bank. The EU masses have no say in electing its directors. Which is exactly the way the bankers & The Fed arranged it, & like it. OGT

john and OGT,
firstly. no it's not utopia. which is why we're having this discussion.
secondly,... either the "social-democrat societies & their economies will be crushed by the EU central bank juggernaut" and we'll all become slaves, or they're used as a model for other nations and things get better.
good transparent government, is our only counter to "a harsh globalized world, dominated by insatiable corporations, banks and imperialism."
yes "Faceless bankers of no fixed abode rule the globe" but it's the identifiable masses that actually run it.

More than half the worlds population lives in extreme poverty, most living with 2 dollars a day, and you still think we are not living in a utopia?....thats blatant

Capitalism works indeed but mostly for the super rich elites and to a small degree for the middle classes, which will soon dissapear due to the globalization process. All the small bussineses will keep on crashing unable to compete with the huge corporations, as it happens every day.

Yes, as you stated: ¨most people have morals¨, but the problem is that in big bussineses and corporations there is no such thing as ¨morals¨, they can´t afford it, they have to keep growing no matter what or just roll downhill getting aquired by a bigger corporate power.

So in this scenario, the super rich corporations are the ones leading the world, choosing presidents, over throwing leaders and manipulating governments. And of course they do this in order to maintain their control over political decisions, so when you combine politicians and corporate leaders what you get is a huge unequality for the vast majority of the people.

You may be living in a capitalist country where there are many benefits compared to other states, but we´ll see how long this lasts in a harsh globalized world, dominated by insaciable corporations, banks and imperialism.

And remember, if one person has to steal to eat or feed his family.....Nobody will be safe.

John,
do you see a contradiction in what you're saying? it's blatant.
"We already have been living in a huge utopia for so long...we desperately need a new system."
if we need a new system then the one we have isn't utopian. i don't want to be pedantic, nit picky or patronizing. just want to make sure we interperate correctly.

i think utopian anarchy requires no ownership, no gov't, no money.
which i see as completely unrealistic in a finite world full of products. i want to own what i produce.

just been googling around a bit and found this on wiki "Anarcho-syndicalism". check out also "the mondragon co-operatives" a real world case of communal capitalism.

i've also been telling people about denmark where i live.
a social democratic society.
we have;
free universal health-care, free education up to doctorate level, strong unions, compulsory holiday pay, 6 months paid leave for each new parent, 12000kr per year for evry citizen until 18 yrs old, good pensions, communal electric and normal cars, communal bikes and more; all within a social democratic capitalist system.

it seems many people are advocating for "throwing the baby out with the bathwater"
capitalism works. most humans have morals. lets combine the two.

agreed; the food & drugs globolates are driving us down the path of self-destruction.

John,

we think alike. In bars & places where people meet today, they beat their gums about this or that failing of government. With Desktop Democracy, each of such places would be a center of organization for people to network & solve their own problems.

For this, a 3-day week & universal wage would be necessary, but we would eliminate the taxes that pay for a vast, parasitic government machine – which is further crippling us with huge corruption.

Hawkpork,

I’m not sure the ‘anarchist utopia’ is an age-old dream. Most of our ancestors spent their lives locked on how to eat & survive. This is actually no longer a problem. We now have machines & automated systems to produce the necessities of life with few hands. That is why unemployment is getting to be such a global problem.

So what is our masters’ plan for all us surplus people? Some kind of ‘cull’, I fear; either a global war, or maybe some bio-engineered epidemic. So you either sit back & suffer that, with military rule, or you go for something else. Desktop Democracy is one ‘something else’.

But if you don’t like the look of it, please hurry up & think of something better, becos we don’t have much time left. We are riding the catastrophe curve to disaster. OGT

We already have been living in a huge utopia for so long, all the oldfashioned ¨isms¨ have just been utopias, so what the heck, Id rather try the ZM system even if it fails, cause the point is WE desperately need a new system.

hi all,
i've been discussing the venus project, and their theory of a "resource based economy" on the "heaven & earth, the rise and fall of socialism" thread, here on tdf.
it seems to me to be just a new and initially valid sounding name for an age old dream: utopian anarchy.
they promote no gov't, no laws, no courts, no value exchange system, no market, no ownership.

The ¨automated¨ system doesnt mean that a single computer will rule the world and that we will obey silently,(like we do nowadays)

The automated system means that we can use technology to help us arrive at decisions, just like the autopilot helps a plane navigate without human assistance.

Using the database loaded in a computer, we can help ourselves in unlimited unimaginable ways to build, design, everything we need considering the resources available.

Nowadays computers are satisfying our egos, our jobs, our entertainment industry, but they havent yet help us make better use of our resources and to better our lives more significantly, we are so used to feel greed for money and power that we cannot see beyond our true needs.

The ZM does seem to be a bit too 'StarTrek' to take seriously, and there are clearly an abundance of holes in the proposal. However, anybody who is opposed to a social change or claims that the followers of ZM are all conspiracy theory wackos are misinformed. There are different levels to these issues, and IMHO the most pressing of these issues is the future of the food industry and the dangerous path that industrial agriculture is guiding our population down. This futuristic society might be a bit far fetched, but it creates awareness and has generated much useful/thought-provoking debate! Better to be informed and against the movement than to simply be ignorant towards it with no opinion at all.

I agree, any time a human or group of humans have concentrated power it will fail. I do not agree with zeitgeist's suggestion that a computer could be the actuall decision maker either. I just do not think that a computer would be capable of weighing the ethical and moral ramifications of its own decisions. I could see a computer being involved in the decision making process but, I think actuall decisions should rest with the people. So I suppose we agree a system where we could all vote on each issue directly via the internet sounds like a good idea. Maybe the computer could be consulted and that opinion thrown in the mix and then citizens could propose the other choices. Then we get together via the internet and decide. Who would impliment these decisions though? Their is a lot to consider and I'm not sure the Venus project is the right answer but, it is along the right track I can say that much.

ez2b12, you make some good points. I'd merely suggest that capitalism is not the base problem, just the shape it takes at the moment.

No economic system, no 'ism', means much if the control is not in the hands of the people. Eg., Russian communism was a disaster, remember? It was a disaster becos 'ownership' of everything was an empty principle in a system where all power was actually concentrated in the Kremlin, at the top.

A new system of democracy, direct democracy, or Desktop Democracy, can give ordinary people the power to run their lives how they want. That is the fundamental issue, IMHO.

Of course, that can only come about thru revolution, becos the old systems of democracy are rotten & corrupted beyond repair. OGT

Reading the comments here is disturbing. Obviousely the powers that be have been very sucessfull at brain washing most of our poulation here in the US. Capitolism has been bred into our very core beings. We can not concieve of motivation for something other than profit. Yet we act shocked when we see young kids out selling drugs and carring weapons. We taught them that mnoney was all that mattered, that they will be nothing and no one without it. So why get shocked when they get it the only way they see possible? They do not have the priviledges most of us have such as freedom of choice (you either get in the game or get killed)opportunity for education and advancement (No jobs in the area and schools are a joke)

So they do what we have told them to, they find a way to make money and gain power. The very government that makes their life style illegal also perpetuates it. We could very easily stop most of the drugs and horrible living conditions. So why don't we? The powers that be can make more money and more easily stay in power if things stay like they are. Ciminal fines and income from the prison system are a huge part of what keeps the cyclical consumption going. If all the drugs and crime stop think of how many would be out of work. Think of all the current felons that would be able to vote again. They are obviousely not the sort that the politicians want to vote as they have already shown their unwillingness to support the current balance of power.

They broke the rules which means they just might think for themselves insted of checking with the powers that be to see what is accepted. They do not want these type of people to be heard as they just might wake some folks up and then the power structure would crumble. So they marginalize them and catagorize them as "bad people" not to be trusted, and very rarely they are right. Most of the time though they have taken a simple person with no bad intent toward anyone and excluded them from society, labelled them for life. This would not be possible without the general public buying theeir bs. Most people I know will not even consider the rights of the accused. Every one says, "Well they broke the law so they get what they deserve."

This is what they have been led to believe, they do not even know the person in question. They have just looked at the label and took it for truth. Now this person gets out of jail and can't get a job, is excluded from society, and is in need. So they break the law again, and the cycle starts over. More money for the prison system and state while we systematically create a person that is now capable of living up to the label we appplied to him. And yet we build more prisons, toughen sentencing for crimes, and slowly chip away at our own civil rights. It is not working, it will never work, wake up before it is too late. People react to their environment, we control that environment- theirfore we create criminals and then persecute our own creations.

Money and power can not be the motivating factor behind a sucessfull society. We must strive to create a different environment where innovation and technology are created to better peoples lives and promote peacfull healthy life styles. If you do not believe that people are a product of their environment watch a doc on this site about the Sanford prison experiment. It only took six days in the created environment to turm normal every day people into monsters. The instructor was even seriousely effected and did things he would have never done unless effected by this environment. The powers that be understand this process to a tee. They do not just control your physical surroundings they control how and what you think. Through the use of religion, patriotism, and resource allocation they are in control of you and me.

duck,
neat point; yet our potential human strength is our group IQ & knowledge. This can only be effective thru a sound democratic society where issues are openly discussed & decided on - why the world is such a screw-up today. It is not becos of lack of intelligence or knowledge. It is becos the key decisions are taken by a small group of power-drunk psychopaths at the top. The enormous fund of wisdom & knowledge of ordinary people is EXCLUDED from governments' decision-making processes.

The top people are international bankers. They want all the power for themselves. They try hard to convince the rest of us we are stupid & incapable of running the world without them.

I am one of those hillbilly hicks that most of you would look down your nose at. I was raised in the back woods and as such, have suffered many of the biases that I speak of.

Having said that, I see an argument over IQ. The problem with IQ is that it is an intelligence test. At the finish of high school, before we graduated, we idiot hillbillies had to take an IQ test as a forerunner to getting into a college. I happened to hit 156.7...wow. I had many colleges courting me to accept them as my choice of higher education. Even got a couple of letters from Mensa...who knew....

IQ depends on how the test was given and if one was allowed to study for the test in the first place. Also, intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not intelligence. I have saved a lot of intelligent people from their lack of knowledge when they have come up to the backwoods on some trek or another.

An example might be the early environmentalists [who supposedly knew everything about nature..] would come to our area and set up camp in a clearing next to a small stream or brook. Intelligence would say that this would be a perfect place to camp, IE, clear area, supply of water and the trees form an ample wind break. Knowledge would say that the clear area's ground was covered by just about every animal track that the forest may be home to. This is a watering spot where animals go to drink and the clearing allows the animals keep vigilance for predators or prey. Then the environmentalists complain that their campsite is attacked by various animals. They have since learned but this learning is knowledge, not intelligence. Many became ill after drinking the cool, clear, natural water not knowing that upstream there was a strong possibility that there may be animal feces, urine, half eaten animals, dead fish, slime, and/or the possibility of the water cutting through a toxic mineral deposit. [I lived near a creek that cut through a uranium deposit, no amount of boiling would clean that water for human consumption..]. We carried quite a few campers out of the woods that had various symptoms from bad water.

As far as your Utopia is concerned. I cannot visualize some plumber or sewer worker coming to unplug your toilet be cause he/she just loves altruistically working in your waste matter no matter how you hand out resources....

Why would you need a human to do that kind of stuff? Just for your example, never heard of Japanese toilets? And as for the required handwork, a bit deeper research on motivation will lead you to the fact that we can do work in pursue of mastery, for example. If all of your basic needs are covered (i.e.: food, which modern techniques can grow in abundance), I know a lot of people who love building things, researching on their subject of interest, in a word 'creating'. The labor you describe is a necessary thing of course, but what about doing it by yourself? or if you are handicapped, maybe your family or a friend? If all our basic needs are covered, would you mind of lending a hand to a friend?
Wow all this sounds like an utopia, but at the same time doesn't sound difficult. Good thing is with the absence of a leader on the Zeitgeist Movement, there's no one to kill to stop it, rest in peace John Lennon.

Old Git Tom
- 07/10/2010 at 13:04

Sam,

how very right you are! All of us tend to take the crap around us for reality, yet it is no more real than our ancestors' beliefs in witches (only 300 years ago).

Hard-wired in our brains is the ideology that we all must work, that no-one is motivated except by money. What twaddle!

In the first place, automated machines do the 'work' today. The highest-paid techies & scientists just sit, think, talk, & push buttons.

In the second place, human society leaps forward whenever people have more leisure time. If you go back 150 years, the bread-heads forecast economic disaster when small children were banned from mines & factories, & put in school. Au contraire, society moved forward as brain power replaced donkey power.

Last, humankind's great thinkers NEVER gave us their great achievements for money. All honor to that brilliant Russian mathematician who told the bringers of big bread to shove it up their a----s. Right! That was an insult to his very being.

The future is shaped by our dreams now: nothing more. This present 'reality' is just a nightmare. OGT

Brilliant ideas with many solutions to many problems.Would swap for today's world in an instance.

Do have one major concern with it presumed that as technology advances we too will upgrade our "software" in unity with the machines and each other.Instantly deleting thousands of years of evolving into what make us human Taking away money and adding advanced technology are outside factors we are human beings who react to whats inside, feelings of love,hated,etc from interacting with other humans.

Humans are also possessions of other humans which we collect, nurture and love or keep to abuse and use, or we steal and entice them off others for feelings of power or love.

We will always find crimes to commit people to fight and cause pain to others just out of bordem or for pure enjoyment.

"fight and cause pain to others just out of bordem or for pure enjoyment"

Sounds like a childhood-trauma-rooted mental disorder... People behave like that because there is poverty, and with poverty comes starvation, and a hard childhood leaves wounds... human nature is not about that. Would you do that stuff to a stranger if all of your basic needs were covered? would you do that to your family or a friend? in the instances you would do that, think where is it rooted, all the paths will lead you to an uncovered basic need, meaning money.

storms2013
- 10/20/2012 at 16:13

Not always true! there is what is called chemical and hormonal embalances, you would not be able to correct a hermaphrodite who is born of both genders, such as the same for those with other physical or internal embalances which are not something that you can educate or change by upbringing, so sorry I have to disagree with your analogy.

Deborah Macaoidh-Selim
- 01/20/2013 at 05:53

Considering some of the actions of those who want for nothing physically, I find this remark to be totally out of touch with reality. Maybe he's just a troll. ;)

Old Git Tom
- 07/07/2010 at 10:37

Mark,

correct! David Hume was a hard-nosed materialist & rationalist philosopher (one of the best), yet he argued that the scientific approach is impossible w/out imagination.

E/body else; try to download & watch "Food Inc". Agribusiness is feeding us junk food. Farmers are being forced to pay for & use only agribusiness animals & seed. One farmer fought back. He was landed with $400,000 legal costs, & still rising.

Genetics allows the patenting of what used to be the common property & benefit of all. If the 'human genome' can be patented, does this mean our bodies are in hock to big business?

Americans are slowly being turned back into feudal serfs - what their ancestors once left Europe to escape from. Fight for your hard-won freedom, or you will lose it. OGT

Yeah gto and Randy, let's keep making companies
and competition just until we run out of resources or
a fat corporate fish kicks us out of bussinnes.
But most important of all let's keep looking the other
way while the gov is making more bloodbaths round
the world.

JustG,
capitalism or communism, it makes little difference if a top minority is in charge of the majority. Without real democracy, you get a filthy deal. The majority can be in control of its own destiny & responsibilities. It doesn't need a remote government & bureaucrats. Running your own town or community is not rocket science. Neither is a 3-day work week & wage for all difficult. And re 'guts', it takes courage to seize your own destiny. Too many people prefer to be told what to think & do in return for a regular paycheck or government handout - the slave mentality. OGT

Some good points. But what is really the reality you are referring to and how should we make it better in your view? Because it's obviously not good. Why do you think it is so and what would you suggest would be the solution? And why do you think 'social democracy' is BS?

@Randy.
Well maybe I can give you some room to move here. How about if I agree to call it social communism? ZG is definitely communist, but the term community based social system could be other things than just that. Like a social democracy.

This is partly why ZG and communism is BS. Do we really think that all people can run things communally on a large scale or will somebody be in charge? Trust me when I say somebody is always in charge.

The ZM if a bogus eutopian dream for those who don't have the guts to face reality and make it better. They'd rather spend their time day dreaming of wishful thinking inanities.

Totally agree OGT, we pay taxes and plenty of abusive bank fees because we are incredibly ignorant and tolerant to government and financial institutions.

WE all need to wake the hell up and stop this madness, and something I completely agree on is the fact that we need to stop supporting and let our children join the army, this imperialism is only good for those on top, for the rest is going to be a living hell in the long run.

Zeitgeist is communism?.... just because you trow them out the ¨communism label¨ ....doesnt make it so. You need to read more about them. Communism, capitalism, free enter- shht and all the others are simply different ways to control the money of the state.

Zeitgeist proposes something radically different, wheter possible or not is up to debate, but if we stay with the same system we´ll be gone pretty soon.

And, read the books. Communism was never, never, meant to be ruled by a dictator. It happened that way because of what GTO and I, (and you, frankly, I have agreed with most of your posts!), talked about... human nature!

Our, (assuming you are American), Founders created a system that could absorb and correct human nature, (unlike communism), but we just won't let it work. That's the problem.

Take all religion out, take all lobbyists out, and it would work just fine.

Our only public religion should be the Constitution of the United States. Anything else is private.

@OGT
Don't mislead. Zeitgeist is communism and only communism and more than that it is completely unrealistic. At best it was created to move people away from the truth movement into some kind of eutopia wanting delusion.

The set is full of complete lies and holds no soundness when it comes to religion, community or reality.

GTO,
you are a mite out of touch. The capitalism versus communism ideological battle was fought out. Verdict? Both systems found wanting.

Whatever Zeitgeist has in mind exactly, IMHO, InfoTech offers humanity the chance for genuine, grassroots self-government. That is the opposite of communism, which seems to depend on top-down control by a centralized state machine.

If you are happy with your present system, enjoy.

Leein,
the probalem with the present system is that the bankers & capitalists have the money power to control out primitive democratic set-ups almost completely. At root, that is why bankrupt governments are fighting wars that are going to ruin our economies. That is why BP is going to get away with covering US coasts with oil filth. Katrina, & so forth - - - .

We, the people, have lost control. Our 'elected' governments are taking away our employment, our houses, & our farms. The world is slipping back into medieval savagery - a ruling aristocratic elite on one side, a mass of ragged, landless day-laborers on the other. Enjoy.

Not the present situation, you say? So sit on yer thumbs until it is. Then it will be too late to squawk.
OGT

this could have been a good doc but they said extremely d*mb thing when the goverment part comes and the human nature!

making are goverment a "cybernet" d*mb! i want a human to be my leader not a robot! if that happens now i'll fight to stop that d*mb thing.

this whole thing is st*pid its just neo communism. it sound as if were just robot or in the lenin/stalin age term "mass labor"..

like communism this doc extremely underestimated the human nature.. there will always be guys that will steal/grab power and if we let them they will do it by force. and with that kind of hallow cybernet system the goverment is up for grabs.

@leein

if you are force to choose who is going to live is it your family with your friends and your love against the world. im sure your going to choose your family, friends, and your love. dont worry i know extreme majority of us will do too.

im sorry to say this but capitalism incheck by democrasy is the goodest goverment/system we can have.. because capitalism feeds are natural being. capitalist system is like nature's system in some degree were like the preditor the prey is the money if you want to survive along with your family you have to work to get that prey(money). and the game of economics is fun. then theres democracy. the most civilies system ever and i doubt any system can surpass it. its freedom for you to do anything speak anything as long as you dont hurt anyone. couple with the check in balance of power that help control are leaders from becoming intoxicated with power cause theres always an equal power that can hold them accountable unlike communism.

I would love the world to end, and re-grow, with regards to the human population. The hope might be that all the people who really don't care for anybody else but themselves die and hopefully burn in the hell they profess. Communism, inevitable leads to a dictator. Yes you can say that given the need for money, requires a leader, so is it not the realization that not have money has "less" motivation to dicatate to others. If the "power" of an individual has no foundation in a non-monetary society. As I understand it, half the people who write on here, are bullsh"ters. After seeing news from around the world, and no not mainstream, I cannot wait till a nuclear bomb lands our heads, because at the minimum, the opporunity to rebuild our world, is actually real and people could rise to fight the silliness of money, given the state of technology that exists. So you ask, duhhhh, what technology? I can only hope that people on here that have a small understanding of the gravity of the situation of the world, do not listen to these silly notions that many present are sill notiations and keep their eyes looknig forward than being happy with this such wonderful system that is place. By the way, your government has screwed you over so much. I am beginning to think your populartion deserve the results. I'll see in 2011 with home, worthless money, and watch the crying begin.

Randy,
if you run an eyeball over the ZG 'Addendum' video you will see a very concise & accurate summary of what is so horribly wrong with our banking/financial system. I've never noticed that kind of radical analysis coming from the Scientology hotenanny, just mumbo-jumbo.
But as I said before, you need a certain fund of knowledge to judge the differances amongst socialism, communism, capitalism, & rheumatism. W/out that, they can all seem much the same. OGT

If ZG seriously aims to reverse humankind’s march to destruction, it must necessarily engage in politics. Politics is essentially about who gets what & how much of resources & geld – core issues for environmental protection.

But if ZG is arguing that some scientific & technical elite are the ‘natural’ leaders in this, they are naïve (at least). Such people have no special expertise in politics. They are important & highly necessary allies, but not leaders. Becos elite control is undemocratic control. The absolute & final criterian in distributing equality of opportunity is the majority will.

Unless this final say is in the hands of the grassroots, we will simply reproduce past catastrophes. The only answer to eco-threats is enhanced democratic control & grassroots power.

As I’ve said before, the writer & scientist HG Wells was a proponent of government by a scientific elite. You can read all about it in ‘Shape of Things to Come’, or watch the old movie.
Wells was a member of the early 20c Round Table, led by Cecil Rhodes & financed by the Rothschild bank. The Round Table was the grandaddy of the Council of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commision, Bilderberg Group, etc., etc. The aim was always global control by an elite of bankers, led by the English-speaking nations.

So the Rhodes Scholarships, which picked up bring young potential leaders like Bill Clinton, then sent them to Oxford for a final polishing in the arts of elite government (lying, theft, mass murder, etc.).

This explains why Clinton shipped cutting-edge military technology to China, & why vast quantities of investment cascaded into China in the 1980s. China is to be the new world economic powerhouse & global policeman, under whitey’s direction.

As they are stubbornly democratic in instinct, Europe & the USA are being destroyed economically. Their national characters are being degraded by the mass importation of cheap foreign labor, so mass unemployment. When their native peoples begin to revolt, the armies & guns will come out to murder democracy. Ruby Ridge & the Branch Davidian massacres were the real ‘shape of things to come’.

The current economic crisis & futile wars on invisible terrorism didn’t ‘kinda, sorta, happen’. They were planned by the Bilderberg Council in its ultra-secret conclaves, & the plans were actioned.

Yet still, we the majority are vastly stronger. The fight-back begins in our heads. If we think like brainless, gutless sheep, we will be slaughtered & sold for greenies. The Great Cull of surplus people is beginning. The shambles of Detroit, New Orleans & Haiti were no accidents. The Russian people is dying out. Eat your grass while you can, Basil, you’re next. OGT

@RANDY not be blow your already huge ego up but i love you man( not in any homo way) just because me and my old lady were just saying the same thing LOL now watch out for Mr. Tommy Davis and Mr. Tom Cruise , they're watching.....

No, I would never fall for something as delusional and cash based as scientology, Id preffer to laugh watching Tom Cruise and Travolta doing that sort of thing.

What I meant of "conspiracy" was the fact that this guy that you "quoted" actually thinks ZM could be the same thing as scientology, and he reffers to both as some sort of twisted NWO by some crazy folks.

I went to school, I DID my research and studies, Im married with two kids. Im a feature film professional with 10 years of experience.

And as for ZM, well no one has ever said anything that could even make me doubt them so far.

It could happen though, I could change my mind someday, cause the "truth" is emergent and not permanent.

‘Slipfeed wrote, (beautifully, I might add…)
“Where there is more than one man, one man will believe himself the others master. Where there is a man that believes himself the others master there is entitlement. Where there is entitlement there is hoarding of resources for personal benefit. Where there is a system there is a flaw. Where there is a flaw there is a way to use that flaw to exploit the system for personal benefit. A flawless system does not exist and cannot be created.
In short, the failings you site in this movement are not failings of the system, but failings of man kind itself. No reconstruction of any system built by man for man will ever succeed in achieving the goals you have outlined where a man is involved, either in it’s construction or use. I’m sorry. Mankind is simply and unequivocally flawed on a fundamental level, and destined to be the harbinger of it’s own destruction. It’s a hard pill to swallow….” ‘

Not, Randy & Slipfeed. You should read a bit more, & a bit more modern. These thoughts are old hat, the common currency of sloppy urban-peasant ‘folk wisdom’ (“what everyone knows”).

Fallacy: becos perfection is unattainable, that does not mean pursuit of the better is in vain. Eg., we all know death is inevitable one day, but most still try to maintain their health as long as possible.

Fallacy: humankind is flawed, therefore all remedial human social systems & schema are doomed. No: human failings have been noted from earliest times. Precisely becos of them, we adopt & improve our socio-political arrangements. And we progress. If it were otherwise, we would still be fighting for bananas.

Equality is a relationship of identicals. Since humankind is marked by individuality, we can only aim for equality of opportunity. Over a century ago, Kropotkin demonstrated that equality of opportunity is a principle observed in nature & evolution. So is group cooperation of a high degree.

The above banal & ill-informed reversions to populist, 19c, sub-Darwinism are actually the products of conservative decadence, the ideology of passivity, cowardice & defeatism. They attempt to justify sitting in the slave barracks & doing nothing.

In fact, they contradict their own sub-Darwinism. That maintains that even the meanest creature struggles to survive & thrive. It doesn’t sit rotting in a ruddy Petrie dish moaning, “There’s nothing we can do. We’re all doomed”.

And if it does, it lacks the effrontery to misrepresent its brainless vaporings as timeless wisdom. OGT

Yeah sure, there must be a conspiracy behind the conspiracy that is behind another conspiracy, hahahaha :D

Common, I been studying ZM for the last 3 years, among of course many other media around, I been watching so much material from everywhere about all topics concerning all problems of society, and ZM is by far the only movement who has actually stepped up with ideas that could actually change things up, anything else has been just the same old complaints and blah blah blah.

Radical?....yes, impossible...no

It can fail, as many have suggested, but we need to move away from this current abomination we live in now and keep trying other systems.

Reading over the various posts on this thread I came across some excellent finds.

The first one, and one I agree with wholeheartedly and this person just expressed my ideas much more eloquently:

Slipfeed wrote, (beautifully, I might add...)

"Where there is more than one man, one man will believe himself the others master.

Where there is a man that believes himself the others master there is entitlement.

Where there is entitlement there is hoarding of resources for personal benefit.

Where there is a system there is a flaw.

Where there is a flaw there is a way to use that flaw to exploit the system for personal benefit.

A flawless system does not exist and cannot be created.

In short, the failings you site in this movement are not failings of the system, but failings of man kind itself. No reconstruction of any system built by man for man will ever succeed in achieving the goals you have outlined where a man is involved, either in it’s construction or use.

I’m sorry. Mankind is simply and unequivocally flawed on a fundamental level, and destined to be the harbinger of it’s own destruction.

It’s a hard pill to swallow…."

-------------------------

Slipfeed, bravo or brava whatever the case may be! And, it's certainly not a hard pill for me to swallow as I think I've stated clearly enough...

You are insane! But, like in ancient Babylon or Sumeria, (or, come to think of it... many ancient semitic societies... hmmm could this explain the bible?) insane men were considered "touched by the gods..." and their skewed wisdom was studied for truth...

Al,
yeah, the path often goes marxism, buddhism, rheumatism. You've got to be at least half-crazed to see the future. The solid, down-to-earth, moderate, sensible, tossers we have as 'leaders' are actually grave-diggers of the future. The future is made by extremist dreamers, or else we settle for nightmare. The slave barracks is safety. Freedom is always full of unknown dangers. OGT

Soo true, its sad how much all politicians change throughout their careers, where they start as young men/women, fiercely oposing the "stablished system".. just to endup protecting the interests of their rich lobbying supporters 30 years later.

‘I am no longer going to engage you on your societal views as they seem to come from Gene Roddenbury. I loved “Star Trek” but it was just a TV show, man!’

You speak truer than you imagine! The future is that exactly, a projection from the knowns of the past, to the relatively unknowns of what is to be. Projection, as in movies, exactly! Seems like sci-fi, don’t it?

That is, until you adopt the alternative view, that the future will be just like the present, or the past. Now, this alternative is truly a fantasy, becos, A. The present does not exist, exept as a notional bridge b/ween past & future; B. We have vast empirical evidence that the past never reproduces exactly as the future – we call that evidence ‘history’.

Even many historians make the fundamental mistake, even tho they see the past as inexorable progression, made by slow, incremental reforms, or convulsive, revolutionary leaps. Even so, they take the illusory, ephemeral state of things called ‘the present’ as some datum of stability.

The hallmark of this age is instability. It’s shaking our world. The future is arriving whether we like it or not, becos we brought it. Nobody invites revolution to the party. It comes as intoxication or hangover. But it comes. The conservatives are yesterday’s revolutionaries. They toast past glories, & damn future possibilities.

Neocons, anarchists & marxists are together in this. All are conservatives, mentally dominated by the past. I hope ZG et al have the necessary bicarb for the new morning. OGT

I am no longer going to engage you on your societal views as they seem to come from Gene Roddenbury. I loved "Star Trek" but it was just a TV show, man!

But, I will agree with you on the Hamlet thing. You are right, the physical depiction is not nearly as important as the underlying context of the character as described in the writing, and as protrayed by the actor.

Afterall, the women of Shakespeare were played by men for nearly, what, 30 years? Fifty?

Randy
to return to your earlier point. We no longer need worry about people being lazy & ‘not pulling their weight’.

Production today is done by automated plants & cybernetics. Really: that’s why Europe & the US have growing armies of unemployed. People as work units are largely redundant. That’s hard to get your head round, I expect. That’s becos like most people, your head has not kept up with history. Blame the pathetic old whores who report for the mass media.

Let’s shock you a bit more. The protestant work ethic we were brought up with is also dead as a dodo. ‘Work’ as we knew it is a stiffening corpse. Cybernautics has taken over from those gangs who swung hammers & shovels not so long ago.

The most profitable production now is of technologies, systems & services – psychic production, the production of ideas. Yeah, hard to grasp also, eh? That’s caused by what Alvin Toffler called ‘future shock’. As science & technology accelerate, the future arrives as a wave like a sonic boom.
It blew away the old industries of Detroit, Pittsburg & the Ruhr.

So what do we do with all those suddenly idle people? Gas chambers? Have a war? But war today is high-tech & low-manned. Six guys pushing buttons at consoles in the Pentagon could handle it. So send troops around the world? Cost-wise, it is very expensive to put a soldier in a foreign field. It is far cheaper to pay him a basic wage to stay at home. Wars as masses of low-cost infantry is dead.

Gas chambers? Hitler tried that approach. The program ground to a halt due to – lack of manpower! Yes, I do not mislead you.

With a guaranteed national wage for everyone, labor-intensive work like house maintenance, education, medical care, etc., could be done by volunteers, a mixture of expert professionals & helpers. Not feasible? I think it is.

When people choose the kind of work they like, when they want to work, & for how long, work ceases to be work. It becomes a hobby, or like getting together with a friendly crowd & having fun.

Randy - ‘Hamlet… the character should really be played by a 17 year old… ‘
With Hamlet, you are not supposed to notice the actor’s age. Like with opera, don’t worry if Juliet is 40 & 180lds. The best movie Hamlet I saw was the 1960s Russian version with Innokenti Smoktunovsky – likely becos it was not far different from the lethal politics of Stalin’s court.

Randy - ‘Hey! Are we communicating civilly? ‘
If so, probably not for long! OGT

To a certain extent, I agree with you. Usury is one of the most easily corruptible systems of economics. I mean, credit card companies are MUCH worse with interest rates, (or "juice" as the mob calls it, or "Vig" which is short for vigorous debt...) than the mob! And, the mob can be much more reasonable! I know a lot of them and they are pretty nice guys! If I had kids, I would definitely let the guys I have met keep an eye on them if I was out. Totally great guys.

Wouldn't trust a banker with my houseplants.

But, in it's essence, it CAN be used to actually help society. Like capitalism itself, it CAN be a force for good, but it is more often a force for horror... really.

To see what I mean, check out a doc on this site called, "The Ascent of Money" it is amazing and very unbiased. It shows how these economic systems CAN work for good, but also shows how they go so terribly, terribly wrong.

I've quite quickly reviewed the recent comments and the only thing I don't get is people's idea that there can be a society w/ no money. Money is not the problem, usury is, a debt based system is.

After all what is money, nothing but paper at this point, but currency has always existed. Money used to represent gold. So, what I am getting at is that whether you have a piece of paper to trade, or something of actual value like precious metals, jewels or even coffee spices or chocolate to trade, it is a monetary system. It's the same thing.

Somebody asked why would people accumulate items when they don't have any value. That is not logical. All things have value regardless of what type of society you dream up. Look at people right now as an example. They have to have the bigger house and the nice car and the bigger boat and the biggest tv etc. In this regard our human nature will not change. Some people want things just to have them, not because they are of any value.

Example: I have a rock collection, but you have much more beautiful type of rock than me. This is not worth any actual value, but it is in our nature to want the better and so I will go in search of an even better rock.

"We have to remember that ever since money was invented, it certainly helped to build emplres and armys for kings to invade neighbor lands, ..."

Finally, this statement is wrong. Money did not do this, usury did. Watch The Money Masters for a good overview of this subject. How can we not see that regardless of whether we are trading pieces of paper or stones or food, it is all the same. It's the usury that is killing us.

If people were serious about change, they would address this subject w/ vigor.

And again, this idea is founded in the goals of the NWO. They WANT a cashless society. How can we not see that a cashless system is nothing more than a system of debit and credit.

Yes. It is in my top 5 favorite films of all time. Along with, "Lion In Winter" which I quoted in an earlier post and the Franco Zefferelli Shakespeare adaptaions, "Romeo & Juliet" and even "Hamlet", (I know, Mel Gibson... but I thought he was a pretty good Hamlet, even though he was really too old-- although, Sir Lawrence Olivier's "Hamlet" was also too old and he is considered the "definitive" Hamlet... the character should really be played by a 17 year old... but... anyways...)

I'm a pretty serious Shakespeare guy. My company sponsors the Philadelphia Shakespeare Festival... and all that.

Possible, yes; but why hang around southern Italy? Wouldn't they have been safer plundering from a border region somewhere? Second thought, maybe we are both right. Maybe the slave mentality could not see that freedom was a bigger prize than booty?
The pattern of events was very similar to Wat Tyler's rebellion of the 14c UK. Tyler's rebels actually captured London, then didn't know what to do next. There is a political chasm between rebellion & revolution.
And the movie was great, eh? OGT

@OGT about Spartacus, my childhood hero since I saw the original movie with Kirk Douglas, and so I studied him all my life and it inspired my love of Ancient Roman history...

"He could have led his army out of Italy to freedom, but he didn’t. He hung around Italy until a Roman army defeated him.
Why? Becos he thought with the mind of a slave. He didn’t know about freedom. All he knew were Roman power & its slave barracks, nothing else."

Um... Scholars have no idea why he didn't leave Italy when he was home free. But, the best theory, backed up with what they know about his generals and closest confidants, is that these men all wanted more PLUNDER, (you know, money?). Spartacus, would have been in effect voted down, as he had already lost several of his best leaders to defection, he would want to please the remaining men.

"They don’t know that science & technology have leaped ahead to the point where we don’t have any more insoluble problem"

That's just delusional. And I am getting insulted that you keep assuming that my information is not up to date, or that my head is in the 19th century?

What the hell, man? You don't know me. IF you saw my library you'd see it is filled with books, some old, many that came out last month and on every topic you can think of, even cooking!

And I was there when the first home computers were born and I have written programs on every computer that was ever made. Technology is not a problem with me and I am reading now about neural networks, "perceptrons" and "imagitrons" and how they work.

I know technology and I can tell you, we certainly do NOT have the technology to solve all of our problems. That's just ridiculous.

Again, who is gonna pay for it, and who is gonna control it. Watch the documentary "Pandora's Box" on this site, and you will see how science and technology gets co-opted by business and politics every time.

I give Al a pass because he seems young and idealistic, if not very well informed or educated, but you seem to be older and better informed, (although in a wierd way...), you get no pass!

Al,
In my view, if you think like a slave, you will always be a slave. Spartacus led a slave revolt against ancient Rome. He won battles. He could have captured Rome, but didn't. He could have led his army out of Italy to freedom, but he didn't. He hung around Italy until a Roman army defeated him.
Why? Becos he thought with the mind of a slave. He didn't know about freedom. All he knew were Roman power & its slave barracks, nothing else.
Screw 'revolt', screw better quality chains. It's revolution or nothing. OGT

I think you are right. Too few people manage to raise their eyes above the struggle thru the everyday mud & grit. They don't know that science & technology have leaped ahead to the point where we don't have any more insoluble problems. It's a sign of the general mind-rot: even the so-called left radicals I've come across are stuck in the mindset of the 19th century. Finally, the only barriers between now, & a far finer future, are the iron bars in our heads. OGT

HA! Well, for the record, I never said, "everything" has been tried and didn;t work. The ZG movement just has the suspicious odor of Communism, (check out the first hour of a doc on this site called Pandora's Box, I think you will like it.) and THAT didn't work. That's all.

Hey, I admit I have a very pessimistic (sp?) view towards humanity. I've worked with convicts, alcholics (grew up with them as an Irishman, LOL), and politicians, so... I've seen some of the worst of human nature up close and it's pretty ugly stuff.

And you are right. There is nothing wrong with trying, even if it won't work. That's why I work with politicians and vote and try to be a good American, even though I believe it is for nothing... so who am I to preach?

Well, you were certainly more respectful of me, that time, than I was with you. I appreciate that, and hope you'll forgive me for being so cranky with you.

I understand. You are one of those "optimists" I keep hearing about. See, I am a cranky old guy, and all I want is for YOU KIDS TO GET OFF MY LAWN!!! (lol)

I'll give you this: I hope you are right. I won't be around to see it, but maybe you will, and life would be better for everyone. I don't think that's possible with us nasty animals, but I don't have the heart to try to crush the hopes of a young person.

And what the hell do I care? I won't ever have to live in your Utopia!

I understand that even without money, there could still be conflicts over land or other issues.

But if we work togheter we can start colonizing the sea and plenty of available space on this earth.

I strongly disagree that we will continue to fight over resources, it has been proven that we have enough resources for a long time in the future, we have enough clean energy resources as it has been stated by many people, we just havent wisely used them for a number of reasons but theyre there.

As a team we can continue working on advancing our space ship technologies, and leave when we can no longer fit in here,
but if we continue to fight this will not happen.

Al, your naive outlook is really rather exhausting and exasperating. Have you ever had a job? Have you been out in the world on your own, yet? Experienced life with these "beautiful human beings that are essentially good" that you seem to think we are surrounded by? Cause I ain't NEVER seen them in my long life on this planet! You tell me where they live?

In Communism, the idea sounded GREAT! Everyone would be provided for by the state for their whole lives. They would get a home, a job, free healthcare, free education all the way through University, and a livable wage, AND everyone would be paid the same amount, so that no one could be more rich and powerful than anyone else! That way, all people were equal!

Well, that didn't work out so good, because, once again, they didn't factor in that thing you think doesn't exist, HUMAN NATURE.

Why should I work my butt off when the guy next to me, who shows up late and drunk and sleeps through his shift, gets paid the same? What's my incentive to work harder?

The answer finally came, when the work was getting all done half-assed. Punishment. And who punishes? The bosses. And the bosses deserve more money don't they? I mean they have SO much more responsibility, maybe they should just get a bigger house, or a car... and on it went, until it finally became a DYSTOPIAN nightmare.

As George Orwell said in "Animal Farm" it finally came down to, "some men are MORE equal than others..." Even this Utopian dream started to fall apart because of human nature.

Money is a motivator. It compels us to succeed, to work harder and try to do better than the other guy. That is really good for society. Really. You usually get the best people when you attract them with more money.

Oh and by the way, the Communist leaders (I think it was Lenin, feel free to correct me...) said the same things you say, "Every citizen would be free to educate themselves and every citizen will become a Socrates, or a Plato..." and science and technology would set them free.

I almost forgot, someone already mentioned that even without money people would still tend to acumulate goods in order to gain power or control over others, but if he wouldnt be able to "sell" what would be the point?

Of course that would be more likely to happen today in a world without moeny, but the idea is to learn to overcome such need to "control" or to gain self power, everybody working for each other, using technology for the heaviest and repetitive jobs, and choosing for ourselves the most entertaining or fullfilling jobs or tasks.

Not thinking about "the machines will make it all" for us, because thats impossible, theres plenty of things that we need to do ourselves, we can become multi-discipline masters in medicine, engineering, designers, teachers, philosophers, gastronomist, and many many other things we like at the same time.

Of course this could lead to many people becoming lazy and not participative, but this is an issue we all need to figure out in order to make a new system without money to work, we can all bring ideas for this laziness not to be possible.

Yes, many ZM ideas are debatable for many people, and many other ideas are pretty clear for many people as well.

But the one thing that is undeniable is that we desperately need to change our direction, our destructive ways if we want to have a future at all.

Some believe that we need to grab the sticks and run the streets in massive protests, but this kind of actions have been made by millions worldwide and nothing substantial has changed in many decades.

Simply because we've been protesting "against our selves", cause WE are the "system" itself, we are the ones that unaware are supporting the system constantly, paying our bills, putting our money in the banks, and buying stuff from each other.

Its not about looking for villans or someone to blame, WE are the ones paying money for all this misery, therefore the system will not change unless WE change our minds.

Some people say that money will never dissapear cause we been using it for centuries, but we have to remember that money is only a system for our trades.

We have to remember that ever since money was invented, it certainly helped to build emplres and armys for kings to invade neighbor lands, ...Money has helped us as well for easy trade indeed but it has also grown to become the biggest enslavement system ever created.

Zeitgeist proposes for example the erradicaton of the monetary system, the political system and the religious systems worldwide, but this presents a huge problem, people nowadays is lazy or ignorant to "lead", so they will always preffer to be "leaded".

So politicians are more likely stay for a long time.

As for religions, many people nowadays feel the need to be "spiritually guided", and they will continue those practices.

BUT IF, the "Monetary system" stays, then theres absolutely NO HOPE for human kind.

Cause if politicians were really honest and giving. they woulndt mind working for free, wouldnt them?

Cause if priests are true "God-sends", they wouldnt mind giving confort and peace of heart to their devotees for free, right?

So, I think that money is the one critical aspect we really need to erradicate above all other debatable issues.

No money, no crime, no corruption, no prostution, no war, no war, no war, no poverty, no unequality and no war....did I mention no war?

I do not believe the robot system will work for me.
I do believe in an international resouce commisionion.
I would like to see less technology, not more
It has been proven, the more technology , the harder we work.
Technology hasn't saved any labor or time or solved many
problems.
If the venus project could ever be accomplished, I believe
their would be the same fights and wars, not because I believe greed inherient in man, but just a control for power

I am impressed this doc has produced so much debate about the subject. I haven't read all of the comments as I just finished watching. The thing that many of us have come to the conclusion is the current system is not working. It is not working so effectively that whether by its own undoing or its intentional undoing by the people in it, it will fail. (The stratification is too much, no species would knowingly let itself die out and this system is killing us. I hope we are not the first.) We must be prepared for this to happen and even though there is much to debate about with the Venus Project, if a little more mental energy is put into it, it can serve as a guideline or at least a transitional system. So, before I read the rest of the comments I wanted to mention that. This is a positive solution that addresses a negative problem. Thank you to those who still must live in this monetary system for spending time and energy towards the development of something much different and possibly much better.

First of all, you are right, I can't site specific examples of a war starting over sex. But, I know people very well, and I know men, and men haven't changed for 100,000 years and won't change for ANOTHER 100,000 years and that is how I know sexual competition, and its ugly by-products, will derail the ZG utopian "idea", (which was tried by Marx and Lenin and it didn't work).

No one ever wrote, "...woke up with a hard-on, think I'll invade England today..." but, we know the characters of men like Henry the VIII or Marc Antony or Alexander or Napolean, etc. and can do some psychological forensics. Alpha Males have a biological need to dominate and all domination becomes a sexual release. Greco-Roman soldiers would often rape their conquered enemies to humiliate them and take their manhood away. Have you ever worked with with convicts in prisons? I have. In a closed society like a prison, you can see the dynamic at work everyday. Alpha Males sexually dominating Beta Males.

And I sited things like high school and the work place, the hierarchy, (which is evident in animal societies as well), of Alpha Males and Beta Males is clear even if the rape is more metaphorical than physical, (although sometimes, as in college or military hazings, it comes damn close!).

So, from a knowledge of men and that sexual dynamic, knowing that all men are encoded that way, it should be clear, (it is to most women, anyway, they see through us pretty well), that beneath the layers of other excuses, religion, politics, economics, etc. is the male need to prove his sexual power and status. Most men, as most women will tell you, can't think past their penises.

A funny side note, it has been written and joked about historically that Napolean conquered the world because he had a one inch penis. Apparently, this sad physical attribute was confirmed by Josephine's diaries and some other sources like the examination of his body, so maybe he WAS actually "compensating". Male vanity also knows no bounds.

As far as voting, I have fairly consistantly voted Libertarian since I was 19. The only times I voted Democratic was when Bush Jr. was running because I was terrified of the stupidity, and I was desperate to keep him out of office. Alas...

I did not vote for Obama, because I, too, realized that he would be powerless to do anything against the towering corporate powers.

And I DO believe that it is a gullible public that gives these criminal, corporate organizations their power. Politicians have no choice but to go to them for the power because the people have sold their Constitutional power to Walmart and Wall Street. Our representitives have no choice but to bow to them. They are supposed to serve US, but we have no power, we gave it away.

I've been saying for awhile now, "The American public is uninformed, because there is no news crawl at the bottom of 'American Idol'".

We have to "Take the Power Back" as Rage Against the Machine admonishes us to do, and we can do that easily, and non-violently, if we have the discipline. Stop buying useless things with credit cards. Break the banks. My wife and I have lived without plastic for over 14 years now, we buy everything in cash, and if we don't have the cash, we either save up for it, or we don't need it.

But, the rest of your ststement, I'm not going to rail against. It would be pointless. If you follow Alex Jones, you have your mind set. It would be like trying to talk you out of your religion.

But, I will say this: it is easier to sit in a basement, circle jerking with your theory buddies and trading your home-made DVD's that claim to prove you are being screwed by evil geniuses bent on world domination, than to actually participate in the system and try to make it work. I would rather to the latter.

And, I don't care what Alex Jones looks like or if he "hollers" I care if he is mentally unstable. And, from my pre-med work, and my work with alchoholics, I could see the signs. That was my point. Don't follow mentally unstable people, their information might not be the most... reliable.

Equally irrational is your claim that a gullible public gives the Bilderberg Group its powers. As I suggested earlier, complete lack of knowledge is no impediment to a career in cracker-barrel rhetoric.

JustG,
indeed, the G-Sachs robbery! The French historian Fernand Braudel writing about medieval Europe: "The town was a standing conspiracy against the peasantry". Our present (collapsing) system of financial capitalism, or rather corporatism, is a conspiracy with its roots in earlier forms.

Corruption is not the problem, the system is. It is institutionalized robbery which is bleeding our world white.

As ZG indicates, we sit amidst the tools, money & materials which could solve all immediate problems, & do nothing. The sheep-like majority looks on all this as normality.

Bankers sit in UK & US governments & tell the pols what to do. This is why Obama is next-to-useless. He promised to end the wars but can't, becos the banksters & their military-industrial corps are making too much money. Remember Vietnam, anyone? Gulf of Tonkin conspiracy?

Fifteen-odd years ago, G-Sachs was dictating London's transport policy. A perfectly good publicly-owned & run system was privatized, & became v/expensive. G-Sachs kept it that way by threatening London's administration with financial blackmail if it tried a public takeover.

Joe/Jane public knows almost nothing about this, so democracy is bypassed.

I'm also not crazy about the personal style of Alex Jones, but that is an irrelevance. No-one is paying him to be loveable. He don't got a PR team to polish his teeth & teach him to smile reassuringly - unlike those lovely demagogues, Clinton & Obama. I bet you really liked & trusted them! C'mon, admit it. You were suckered into voting for one or the other, weren't you?

As with Monica Lewinsky, it's no use being angry after being used & abused.

Jones breaks very important news. I've followed him for some years. He FORECASTS what the big boys are going to do next, & has been proved correct many times. This is the acid test that separates the blowhards from the real dissidents. May he hoot & holler for ever! OGT

Woulndt it be awesome if at least 5 percent of all politicians were like your wonderful John Adler?
Those are indeed rare cases, like Ron Paul who has my respect to some degree.

And yes, there are many people conecting "crazy conspiracy dots" here and there, but as I kinda of agree with your thoughts on Alex Jones that he is delusional, that doesn't mean that every thing he says is a crazy lie. Just like you and me, he has seen a lot of things. He is of course wrong with all the NWO crap, but he has made some great remarks on other areas.

We are all wrong and right on all issues, we are not perfect.

Thats when our common sense takes control, and accept some and discard some information, but to call them all "crazy conspiracy makers" is not good I think.

Al: I know Im a lost cause bud, but I thought Id give it a try, and I also like people like you, who are religious and can still quote Marylin Manson: "the weak ones are there to justify the strong".

Well, my congressman, John Adler, is a great guy and a dedicated public servant who answers my e-mails personally within 48 hours. He holds regular meetings with local small businessmen, (like me) and really listens to our concerns. He does his bast to accomidate us, despite overwhelming odds, like slashed budgets, and yes, corruption. But, he is just one of many very sincere dedicated people trying to make a difference in a twisted system.

@JustG:

Yes, I know I am wrong. I HAVE to be wrong about not believing in conspiracy thoeries. There is no possible way for me to be right. Conspiracy Theorists use no evidence as proof of a "cover-up" and if you show them solid gold proof against their world view, well, "it's all part of the plot..."

It's a self perpetuating, self feeding endless loop. It's a trap, man! I been there. When I was a kid I believed them all. Then I grew up.

Our lives are effected by random, chaotic events that no one can control and when they try, more random chaotic events occur. No one is in control. They aren't smart enough to control anything for longer than a couple years, before it blows up. Look at Goldman-Sachs. That was a conspiracy. It was feuled by stupid greed and ego. It blew up. Just one of thousands of examples throughout history; isolated incidents that the theorists connect to make a huge plot.

Oh, and Alex Jones is, in my opinion, from watching his documentaries, an undiagnosed, manic, delusional paranoid, feuled by either speed, (coke or meth), alchohol, (because of the edema I see in his puffy skin and other signs of hard drinking), or a little of both. Or, as a result of self medicating from a bi-polar disorder. Run away!

Wow, a Zeitgeister calling policy changes naive. Never thought I'd see such an open contradiction.

Gay people. According to ZG they have learned to be gay and this can be corrected. Would you agree?

Their born like that you say? So some people can be born with a tendency of sexual attraction towards the same sex but people can't be born with a tendency towards violence? Get your head out of your a$$.

ZG is a cop out for the weak. Anyone who believes in what they preach, and I do mean anyone, has a weak will, and probably doesn't have what it takes to achieve a good life on their own. Instead of taking responsibility for their own life, they blame the system.

Of course I know the Bilderburgers and the Tri-Lateral Com. exists. I just can't beleive the powers given to them by the tin-foil hat wearers. They are a group of rich douche-bags that do everything they can to make sure they stay rich forever. That's pretty much their mission statement.

And, OGT, they do it all so they can get laid! Sex is the motivator, the ulimate force of nature that we all obey, (well, not me anymore, I'm too old...)

Yes, every war is indirectly or directly related to sex. This debate is related to sex. You as a male, you need to prove me wrong, to dominate me. It's in your nature. In that way you prove yourself a superior genetic progenitor. It's almost automatic and you'll do it until the day you die, no matter how old. The instinct is encoded in the DNA.

Proving yourself the Alpha Male, gets you chicks. That's where wars come from. Any male activity must consider that component of our nature.

You can't tap dance your way out of this. You know this is true. You went to high-school didn't you? You have spent time in any work place, you know how males compete, even for a silly thing like a corner office, just to get laid. And you know that these things (ALL of my examples, not just this one) can often lead to violence and even murder.

YES, there are hundreds of cases where a man has killed another for a corner office. My wife watches true crime shows, I've seen the cases. I know how you argue now, picking apart my examples instead of addressing them as part of a whole. See, that corner office TRANSLATES UP to war. What any two men can do, a nation does as well.

To quote King Henry the 1st in "The Lion in Winter"- "A nation is a HUMAN thing, it does what we tell it, and for our reasons!"

Yes, there are conspiracies, lots of them, operating all the time. Mostly run by greedy, drooling, i***** that wouldn't be able to describe a book to you let alone read one.

That's the reason I know that there is no one in charge. Any two conspiracies bumping up against each other will usually either, wipe each other out, or stumble into a courtroom from the noise of their in-fighting, (usually over a chick!).

What I am saying is that the loonies give these groups awesome power when in reality they are just rich greedy, short-sighted. Any time you get three guys in a room, no two will ever agree on anything and soon a fight will break out among them.

There is no one in charge, not up in the sky, not in the White House, we are on our own.

Randy/OGT, funny I find myself agreeing and disagreeing in some part w/ you both. 1st it is sound to say that men will compete for women. And equally to say that women prefer the bigger stronger and / or wealthier. Therefore men will always try to make gains.

However, anyone who says that there are no conspiracy theories is just not paying attention. And Randy it IS a fallacy to argue against OGT with a red herring.

In fact more so because he used two legitimate names. We have all heard the term NWO used so many times by the power elite it's common place.

The term Bilderburg is almost as common. This is an actual group of elitist. If you know as much as you say you do you should know this.

Randy,
‘I’ll go one step further, I submit that every war that was ever started was started over sex.’

You seem to be oversold on Freud, Adler (?), &/or Reich. I can assure you there is no historical evidence that sex is a primary source of wars. That’s a cracker-barrel theory, very popular with sex-obsessed adolescents. What’s the prize of the Iraq war, tail or oil?

‘A rule of nature is that the more dangerous the animal, the more complex their society must be. We are the most dangerous animal, therefore, the most complex society.’

Another CB-theory of yours. ‘Dangerous’ to whom or what? Predators can be pack animals or loners.

‘However, when they make contact with another group, all bets are off. This is observed in chimps, gorillas, and wolves, to name a few. Savage warfare is the result, and chimps have been seen eating the flesh of the enemy troupe.’

More CB-rot; wolves expel some members. These become ‘lone wolves’. They either form another pack to survive (cooperation), or are killed by their vulnerable isolation. Agreed, chimp groups sometimes war. On the other hand, to undermine your excessive generalization, antelopes often feed next to lion prides while elephants walk on by & ignore them.

‘… you have to look at the whole picture.’
Indeed, try it.

‘I don’t know what you mean by repeating the “cracker-barrel” pergorative… do you think I’m from the south?’

It’s nothing geographical. It’s the usual median level of negative information & misinformation you meet everywhere with the general public. As said, not ordinary people’s fault they are convinced that the crap that fills their heads is ‘what everybody knows’. They have no clue that such fantasies as a universal, Darwinian struggle for survival, or ‘there is no such thing as a free lunch’, are parts of a ruling-class ideology that have little or no support from the sciences involved.

‘But, your use of the names “Bilderberger” and NWO tells me you are a conspiracy loonie. I’ve been collecting books on conspiracy theories since I was 12.’

I’ve read a lot of crap too, in my time. You have to apply the consistency test. Are the claims self-consistent, & do they fit with what you are reasonably sure is reliable. But to use this test, you have to know quite a bit. By this test, Bilderberg is very much a reality, with much supporting evidence. The NWO is its long-term strategy.

Read some more stuff, before throwing wild, woolly & baseless opinions around. Read some Carroll Quigley stuff. He was a historian who worked with the ‘elite’ above, & knew them from the inside. He was Bill Clinton’s history tutor at Georgetown University. OGT

I'll go one step further, I submit that every war that was ever started was started over sex. Men who are trying to get laid and displaying their power for status, which in turn, gets them laid. I'll go even further, most men do EVERYTHING to get laid.

Yes, dangerous animals that live in communities try hard to avoid killing each other, within their communities. I assumed everyone got that. A rule of nature is that the more dangerous the animal, the more complex their society must be. We are the most dangerous animal, therefore, the most complex society.

However, when they make contact with another group, all bets are off. This is observed in chimps, gorillas, and wolves, to name a few. Savage warfare is the result, and chimps have been seen eating the flesh of the enemy troupe.

The reason war has not been successful as a population control for humans, (although it certainly would have been before the advent of civilization), is because of the advance of medicine and science. Infant mortality has been dropping for centuries and more people get better from what used to be mortal wounds and sickness. Also, of course, agriculture and the use of technology to get food to larger areas, etc. I mean, obviously... you have to look at the whole picture.

I don't know what you mean by repeating the "cracker-barrel" pergorative... do you think I'm from the south? But, your use of the names "Bilderberger" and NWO tells me you are a conspiracy loonie.

I've been collecting books on conspiracy theories since I was 12. I know them all. Illuminati, Knights Templar, Tri-lateral Commission, JFK and other assassination quackery, UFO mythology, the Great Reptiloid Invasion from Zeta Reticuli, The Priory of Scion, 9/11 claptrap, and on and on... they are fun, but people who believe them are whackos. I have dozens and dozens of books on the subjects and as many that refute them. I always read both sides.

I think YOU need to get your head out of the fantasy "Star Trek" world and look at some reality.

Randy (& JustG),
‘And he misunderstood everything I said. I never said it was a serious problem, and I never spoke of getting all the sex you want. I said that violence over sex will happen and it’s fine that it does. That’s how we were designed by nature.’

No, I just extended your base argument to expose its basic weakness. You are also guilty of confusing violence & competition – eg., sport competition versus warfare, or cocktail-party jockeying versus rape raids on the next cave (clubbing anyone?). Human nature equips us for sophisticated, peaceful cooperation as well as violent conflict (as I said).

First you suggest sexual competition is a minor, then a major problem; make your mind up. Eg. -

‘Wars have been started over sex. Men will always, ALWAYS, fight other men for sex, even if it only over ONE woman, (Helen of Troy, anyone?), but there is nothing wrong with it.’

Not so: I know of no actual war that had sexual competition as cause. Helen of Troy is myth. Caesar fought Mark Anthony for Cleopatra? Not really; Cleo was Queen of Egypt, so whoever married her could claim the throne of Egypt. Egypt was a major chunk of the Roman empire, so next step was Emperor of Rome. When Anthony got round to smooching her, she was an old boiler.

‘Indeed, territorial and sexual combat is a perfect form of population control and is used throughout nature. It’s observable fact.’

Twaddle: if war were an efficient population control mechanism, why are we facing human over-population after so many wars?

You’re back to your cracker-barrel fallacies. If you would update your biology reading from 1859, you would find that modern research shows that animals of various species commonly have very sophisticated strategies for avoiding violent conflict. For animal survival, violence is counter-productive, mostly a last resort. Genes actually limit reproduction rates when food resources grow scarce.

Your outdated ‘fact’ is based on a century-plus of non-observation by non-scientists, from cracker-barrel observation posts. Not your fault entirely. Our Bilderberg & NWO masters have a keen interest in maintaining the popularity of obsolete scientific & philosophical notions – for ideological purposes. The less we know, the weaker we are, & the easier to control. Knowledge is power. OGT

OGT, just caught your other comment on corruption. I disagree. If corruption wasn't the problem, these crooks wouldn't have secretly planned and schemed behind closed doors so long to get it to work. They are still quietly working behind the scenes to remove more and more of the given rights, freedoms, protections etc.

I've already posted on this as well. Look at the problem of usury. As I've said money isn't the problem usury is. A debt based system is. etc.

We cannot stop logic to sit around waiting or hoping for some crazy ideal of wonderland. Especially when that is simply slavery over freedom. When it is the one thing these crooks want to begin with. The ZM is a sham brought to you by NWO supporters plain and simple.

"Sexual competition as a serious problem? Hardly; rather, spices things up a lot. Getting all the sex you fantasize about only sounds good. Rather like having your favorite team win every time. Great at first, then just boring."

And he misunderstood everything I said. I never said it was a serious problem, and I never spoke of getting all the sex you want.

I said that violence over sex will happen and it's fine that it does. That's how we were designed by nature.

Wars have been started over sex. Men will always, ALWAYS, fight other men for sex, even if it only over ONE woman, (Helen of Troy, anyone?), but there is nothing wrong with it. Indeed, territorial and sexual combat is a perfect form of population control and is used throughout nature. It's observable fact.

You are trying to divorce us from our animal nature like all those others you mentioned tried to. I'm saying you are falling into the SAME old, old trap. Get it?

OGT: (oops hit wrong key above),
I'm not sure you are taking his comment in the right context. He appears to be offering one small reason why the ZM couldn't work. Everything is suppose to be equal right? But unless they take away sex drive, men ARE going to compete for the best females. And surely women will not change so much that they are not swayed by money or possession anymore.

Sexual competition as a serious problem? Hardly; rather, spices things up a lot. Getting all the sex you fantasize about only sounds good. Rather like having your favorite team win every time. Great at first, then just boring. Where’d the pre-game thrill go?

Get with us post-modern, jazz-age, rock-a-boogie, pseudo-intellectuals, Randy. Otherwise, you will end up like those girls in the back rows of picture palaces – clinging to old-fashioned fallacies. OGT

JustG,
“You are assuming that people are incorruptible; if you stop and ask yourself why we are in this mess, you will see that is the reason, not because the systems are inherently flawed. Communism failed in Russia because of corruption; democracy failed in the US because of corruption.”

As I claimed, corruption is A problem, not THE problem. If you had read all the stuff I have, you might be convinced. I can’t do that in one postette. Corruption appeared in the Soviet system as a product of a failed revolution. It never achieved democracy. It rotted fast into the most vicious dictatorship the world has ever seen. As thousands were being shipped into slave camps, a vast criminal Mafya was making fortunes.

Corruption did not cause the economic collapse of the French Law’s System, or the South Sea Bubble in the 18C; nor the Great Depression of 1930, or the banking crisis of 2009. The people caught out then & now always screamed, ‘Corruption! We wuz robbed’. Sure there was corruption, but the base mechanism was the perfectly normal workings of capitalist economics. Without democratic macro control, capitalism always ends in tears. Collapse is systemic.

If you view the ZG stuff on deficit banking, you will quickly see that it is the arithmetic of institutionalized robbery imposed on a docile public. The problem is not rotten bankers, the problem is banks. The problem is not rotten capitalists, the problem is capitalism. Both can work for social good, but you have to keep these powerful beasts under firm control.
Domesticated, they serve us: uncontrolled, they turn into wild animals that savage us.

But does ZG have the balls for these tasks? Must admit, it seems rather wishy-washy in its lack of radical, revolutionary zeal. That is ominous. The Beast will not be slain by technocrats, nor by Al Gore-type eco-freaks, however important they are to a movement.

The US Constitution was brilliant, 200 years ago. It is now old, tired, & being neutered by the likes of George Bush II & Obama. You can’t turn the clock back to some Golden Age. History never works that way. The time has come for a new revolution. We move forward, or we die: very simple.

Human nature is currently being redefined in the light of new genetic & epigenetic discoveries, & much else. IMHO we are dangerously volatile balances of cooperation & aggression. But that can be factored into any future better way of running things, if we are aware of it.

The important thing is that we have the collective intelligence to adapt to changed circumstances. If we don’t got that, we will go extinct. OGT

"If there is an abundance, not for some people but for all people, there is no real need for greed and other negative human behaviours.
Greed is the excessive or rapacious desire and pursuit of money, wealth, power..."

I just had another thought, when I read this, that the ZG'ers and alot of post-modern psuedo-intellectuals keep forgetting to factor into their societal equations. Sex.

No matter how much you try, (and will always fail), to assuage human greed, human male sexuality will always rear its ugly head, (no pun intended!), to cause a whole new set of problems. Even if you all have everything you need, the males will try and puff themselves up and seperate themselves from the pack to impress the most females.

And, they will compete, usually violently, with other males for the most desirable females. There has been as much violence in our history, perhaps more, over SEX than for any other reason.

THAT is certainly undeniable human nature that can never be overcome with any social ideology. Certainly, everyone can agree to that! The biological imperative to procreate is an unstoppable force of nature. And it is in our best interest as a species if we compete with other males, dominating the weak, so that stronger genes are passed on.

Females want the best, strongest, prettiest, genes and they look for the males that can protect them and their offspring when she is vulnerable in childbirth/rearing. That's just nature. Nothing can change that.

It's just another example of our simple primate physiology and psychology that we can't overcome, and why I agree with Frued's last and bleakest book. Freud was wrong about a lot of things, but after a lifetime of studying humans, he finally just gave up. We are kind of hopeless, actually...

You said, "And again, no there is no such thing as human nature, there is however human behavior learned and put to practice, nothing more..."

That is simply, utterly, and patently false. Respectfully, you are wrong about that. Human behaviour is a vast field of study that has proven for longer than your whole family has been alive, (I mean grand and great-grand ancestors!), through rigorous testing, that there is, indeed, a basic human nature, and that it is pretty ugly, for the most part.

And then there is history and then there is our own natural history, (evolution and biology), that prove that statement to be wrong.

We are indeed, born wild animals, and must be "domesticated" over a long training period, in order to be useful and productive members of community.

Stop reading the internet, start reading books. Not ZG books-- science, sociology, political history... start with the established, (sometimes failed, so you can learn by example!) ideas before you go off trying to invent new ones. Otherwise, you are just flopping like a fish on the dock.

Al: you seem to be missing one very important point, any system that supports freedom is better than one the supports slavery.

What you also fail to see is that you support the same goals as the NWO.

IF we cannot regain our constitution(s), the mechanism for our protection, how do you plan to make anything any better without that protection?

This is the only way it will happen; because the goals of the NWO are the same. They want everyone to be equal and they want a one world government. However, their version is entirely different than the hogwash that is Zeitgeist. They have not spent so much time oppressing the third world and destroying ours so they can turn around and give them a decent livng. No, everyone will be brought down to the third world level, no middle class, only rich and poor. THAT will be your 'paradise'.

What you believe is a lie and a dupe. Use some logic, you are not employing critical thought. There is a philosophy that advises us people will not see the truth until the boot of oppression is upon their face. Let that not be you.

"all you people bitching that thier plan plan wont work do you have a f…ing better one. if so lets hear it. The system we have now has to go. It dosen’t work it dosen’t what kinda goverment it is."

To that I would answer, how about the Constitution of the US? Why don't we give that a try? We haven't yet, not in our lifetimes, or the several generations before us, anyway. It was a pretty good idea, our Founding Fathers being brilliant, visionary men.

It had all these built-in safeguards for corruption and greed and it was self correcting like science. Absolutely beautiful.

Other countries managed to make it work for them. We invented it, I think we should use it. When we have an average 25-30% voter turn out and France has a 90% turn out, something is really wrong!

I have always said, "I love America! I just wish I lived in it..."

And finally, I repeat my earlier admonishment, "Historically, what we MUST have learned by now is that anytime the word “Utopia” is used, we MUST run away screaming."

Well we all certainly have some interest in this fantasy New World stuff. However where did it come from? How much ART vs ORIGINAL Intellect was formulated by the grand creator of the Z-G Movie, Peter Joseph [sans his real name]. It's a nice bit of compilied, blah blah blah from various you tube bits and pieces, including lots and lots from the King of CON-spiracacy theorey, MR Alex Jones...take a bow Alex !!!! I noticed the credits seemed a tade thin in all the Z-G works, then again SatanSay [A bad work in progress of a parody of fancies of flight streaming across you tube my tube every second] only credits Hell in carnate.

Also the Venus Project [much from 1967 Montreal's World Fiascoe ? and other World Expo events, which show us a little peaky of the future... only attainable if we do hit a world population of 1/2 billion or less... Teee Heee]... what are the credentials in terms of where Mr Jacques Venus was employed? Besides the fancy fantasy new world designs, where everybody poops lolly pops, and piddles sweet Ginger Ale, WHAT HAS Jacques done? He does have a fancy little swampy compound in South Florida, called Venus, which he will sell for a measily $500,000.

Check out the Wiki's and other sources for these two intellectual giants.

talk will never change anything action will im not preatending i now what would be a good new system. but the system we got has to go. we can talk about it witch is ok but at some poiont action has to be done or we'll be talking foever. does anyone on this site have any idea what kinda system they would think would work.

well why would the nwo witch is for profit create something that insin't for profit and if it is then whats the plan for a different sytem because the we got sucks. were slaves for the people at the top. is revolution the ansewer?

Jeff, please go back and read what I wrote again. 1st it was addressed to Al. 2nd, what you are failing to see in my message is that the NWO created the movement and by blindly following the movement, you are following the NWO whether you know it or not.

You don't see anything better? Could you please argue the benefits of slavery vs freedom?

the movement has nothing to do with the nwo those people are greedy people for profit the movement is not. Im not saying thier plane the movent is perfect but at least thier trying to come up with a better system i don't hear any other people coming up with something better.and i resent that you said i was dreaming about nwo ideas.

You are assuming that people are incorruptible; if you stop and ask yourself why we are in this mess, you will see that is the reason, not because the systems are inherently flawed. Communism failed in Russia because of corruption; democracy failed in the US because of corruption. Your utopia will not be immune. Surely you have to recognize that animals outside of the human race do not have the same moral/immoral make up as man? I think this may have already been pointed out, but for example, when a lion takes over another pride and kills all the males and cubs, we do not consider this immoral, we consider it nature. The lion in not ‘bad’.

Man on the other hand is different. We do have a universal morality/immorality to contend with. I would also point out that ants do not have higher thought. As I understand, they have ‘hive think’ not unlike bees, bats etc. So unless you are going to go so far as to suggest we become borg like, I think you can see that this argument is not logical.

When you ask ‘should we be more complicated than insects’ I have to wonder what you’re thinking. Do you realize you are a proponent of slavery? Do you understand where this philosophy is leading you and what it means? Quite frankly and no offence intended, but you are a NWO dream. Walk quite happily and gladly into the NWO system that will strip you of your rights, your freedoms, your ability to go or do what you want, to provide for yourself or your family in the way you see fit etc etc.

I think you can probably see why myself and so many others prefer freedom can you not? If you look back there is a long of history of man trying to control man. Just look at the Catholic church. Do you have any idea how many people died because of the reformation? For this freedom?

It breaks my heart to see people willingly accept the complete loss of freedom and control over their lives. To willingly allow themselves to be enslaved. I know you don’t or won’t see it this way, but stop and think about what you are saying and the practicality of it. Those who are currently leading the world are setting up exactly what you are asking for. Only they’ve given you this pretty deluded picture called Zeitgeist (also the new age movement) to make it look nice. It won’t be.

Ask yourself if you want to be a slave? Mark my words, there will always be those who control others, you have to accept that man is inherently corrupt. This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t find ways of making this a better world just like the rest of us, just don’t be deluded into thinking slavery is a good thing. The ZM is a very dangerous and deceitful tool. Even if they make many good points, how can you base your philosophy on something that is full of such lies and inanity? You are free to choose your life’s path, don’t choose the path that will see those rights obliterated. Don’t choose a path that will see the last 500 years fighting for freedom against tyranny obliterated.

Im very sorry about the "mom" example, but again it was a general example of the unconditional love between the two.

No, theres no such thing as "human nature", people is not basically "good or bad", people as well as the animals REACT to their environment in order to survive.

People doesnt kill each other in the streets simply because they are obeying the "rules of society", people know they don't need to, because their needs can be obtained without violent behaviour, and because they also know that if they kill they can also be killed themselves, and not because they are blindly obeying "rules".

Aberrant or "bad" behaviour is not part of our genetics, if it was so, we would all be dead by now,.... but yes there are scientific studies of the "rejection" to other different species, colors or cultures, however theres a difference between being naturally born"racists", and another thing is being naturally "born killers", if it was so we would all be dead by now.

In other words a kid might be born rejecting someone "different", but wether he wants or needs to kill the "different" is up to what he learns through his life.

And as for "human territorial fights", it all comes down to what the conquerer will enjoy as payments, power, control and privileges, thats what they all have been fighting for throughout history, and not because of "freedom" or actual need to "own" more land.

In other words we havent learn to really cooperate, we havent learn that there are no "superior races", we havent learn that we all need each other if we want to continue advancing our civilization to unimaginable stages.

No comunism, no capitalism no socialism and none of the oldfashined ways of social politics are going to saves us, they have all proven wrong for so long, and the only point that ZM is proposing is that we take another direction without holding on blindly to our current ways.

This is however, by no means that we either have to "trust" some organization and follow a different "leader", this is about taking the steps as a society to move in the next logical direction, and discarding the old ways and try something radically different for a radical change.

This is not about who has the "truth", is about finding our things in common, wich is the survival of us all and cooperate accordingly.

Well, don't use MY mother as an example, because in her case, raising me was a horrible obligation on her part and she let me know how much I ruined her life, many times. So, whatever, she's dead now.

No, you proceed from a false assumption. You assume people are basically good, and they sometimes do bad things. Closer to the truth is, good and bad are just game rules that change all the time throughout history. And that people are just pack animals that obey a community hierarchy like any pack of wolves, primate troupe, or other co-operative higher mammal.

In that respect, given that you and many "civilized" humans, label "animal" behaviour, like killing a competitor and taking his stuff, as BAD, then people are born bad and struggle to obey the rules, (be GOOD).

It is, in fact, part of our geneitc, animal makeup to: wage war for territory, (almost every animal on the planet does this, we are no different, we just use better tools), drive away or kill animals that look different than us, (even dolphins are racists, horribly torturing and killing dolphins of another species), and many other examples of what you might call horrible acts. Nature is often whimsically cruel, and so are we, (being part of nature...).

However, we try and obey the rules as do I, because that's in the best interest of our survival. But, when the rules seem to be unjust to a large group, (and they always do at some point), the revolution happens.

Communism is a fantastic, beautiful idea in theory and on paper, but in practice? Sucked. Because it didn't take into account basic human greed, and its capacity for corruption, (which only a great act of evolution will ever get rid of, and no social or religious idea ever will!), which always must be factored into any system.

If you are an uncontrollable savage primate, why dont you run to the streets killing everyone you find and raping every women you see?

Cause you been taught to avoid such violent behaviours from the day you were born right?

People learn and react to their environments, people is not violent from birth, people nowadays is so unhappy and miserable for poverty, unequality, crime, corruption hunger and so on.....so they react to that.

Would you agree that humans could be a lot smarter not to kill each other and to help each other without compensation?

I do, have you ever paid your mother for having raised you and fed you and for taking care of you?...of course not...was it her obligation?

So why couldnt we learn to treat each other like brothers instead of enemies or competitors.

Freud was wrong, because he didnt include the motivation of the mases to be discontent, wich was and always been unequality, poverty, ignorance, and so on, why didnt he talk about the religion, political and finantial issues as the main
factors for social depravation?

Um... While I agree that hive insects are probably what will take over as the dominant lifeform on this planet after we are extinct, you have to understand that human beings can not anything like hive insects.

Human beings are savage primates with wild, uncontrollable (spelling?) impulses and horrible yet beautiful imaginations. I agree with Freud's last book, "Civilization in Discontent" when he stated that humanity is incapable of domestication.

He stated that the role of civilization is to control the population, but the control caused discontent. The discontent caused violent retribution/revolution and the new civilization, (often called "Utopia"), would find IT needed to control... and the cycle would never end.

His conclusion was that humanity was a failed species that could never govern itself in large numbers. I agree.

But, putting that aside; historically, what we MUST have learned by now is that anytime the word "Utopia" is used, we MUST run away screaming.

Maybe ants do go to war with other insects, but they fight with their bodies, they dont use highly environmental toxic weapons of mass destruction that are contaminating the earth for centuries, do they?

Bees have a queen and they take care of her simply because they were all born from her, and their colonies depend on her, we werent born from the queen neither we need her to survive, do we?

And yeah sure, "philosopher" sounds "smart", but we would have to hear "his/her" philosophical arguements woulnt we?

And how is ZM going to happen with people like you standing in the way?
I don't know exactly what you want to hear, but I don't think the ZM actually needs to "gun-fight" or to "force" anyone in order to achive its goals.

I didnt just watch ZM movies in order to believe their arguements, believe me Ive seen dozens and dozens of documentaries, articles, tv shows and all kinds of information from all kinds of sources to come to the conclusion that we need these radical changes.

Yeah, you can keep on believing on "demoncracy" or your religion or "demoncratic elections and all those things, but in the end is going to be decided by a growing majority, wether is more to your side or mine. Its going to be about what the real majorities of the world feel, probly neither yours and neither my beliefs.

to quote Nietzsche again( by the way Socrates was 5 thousand years ago not 2, and he did not refute him, in fact the opposite is true) "And how could there exist a 'common good'! The expression is a self-contradiction: what can be common has ever been but little value. In the end it must be as it has always been: great things are for the great, abysses for the profound, shudders and delicacies, for the refined, and, in sum, all rare things for the rare."

young,
'You should know how weak that argument is. You would be hard pressed to find a single philosopher or even a student of philosophy that agrees with your statement.

Once again I’ll ask, how is ZG going to happen when you have people like me who stand in the way?'

For the (yawn) third time, Socrates et al dispelled your hoary old belief.

But why should you also believe ZG, etc., somehow challenges your radical individualism? A better system than we have must accommodate dissent Real democracy is based on voluntary cooperation, not imposed uniformity.

As another philosopher said, equality is a relationship of identicals. Since humans are not identical, we strive for equality of opportunity. Is that so very threatening? OGT

Let me give you a little example of how a true honest society works without an actual monetary compensation.

Do you know why, antz, bees, and many other insects and other animals are able to maintain highly efficient societies?

I'll tell you why, because they work for each other, they dont acumulate richness for a few of them, they work as a real team.
where noone is left behind, they all take care of the ill, the newborns and everything as a team.

Maybe us humans are actually dumber than insects?...we seem to do all the opposite things to real brotherhoods.

Yeah you can say: "Humans are just more complicated than insects",......but should we be so?

" Communism or capitalism doesn’t fail because they are inherently bad, they fail because man corrupts them. " JustG

WHAT?
Seriously?

then what are communism and capitalism made for? aliens? dogs?

Those are ideas made by and for MEN, and if MEN can't make them work because MEN corrupts them , then basically those ideas are NOT compatible with MEN and therefore not good for anything, ergo BAD, badly architected, if they don't work for MEN and they're no good, BAD.

Now as for me, I'm a capitalist, it is far from perfect but certainly better than communism IMO. The problem with this "proposal" which is nothing new really, just some old socialist idea with a facelift is that it requires a new type of man that do not exist, not to mention simply wrong statement about technology which is nowhere near to what they mention there.

You gotta work with what you have, revolutions, unless strictly made to break from tyranny almost always end up badly.

IF the monetary system disappears? You know, that sounds familiar... oh yea, we are being moved into a cashless society by the NWO controllers.

Don't you see that money is not the actual problem, you and I could trade bottle caps if we decided they had value. Don't you see that whether you trade actual goods or credits or work load for something, there is a 'monetary system'?

If I work for my employer and he gives me food, and I can trade that food for something else etc etc, is that not in a way a monetary system? In this wonderland, how does it actually work? If I recall people don't have to do anything and machines do all the work or something. What that tells me is that this movement is calling the laziest of our kind. A theory that holds true given the fact that most are so lazy they don't research one thing the movie tells them, but believe it blindly.

Do you know what usury is? Do you know what a debt system is? Why not figure out the actual problems with money because honestly if we can fix this, we would not be in this mess.

And let me just say this: you say 'you don't need an army. that IF the monetary system dissapears... '

That is an unordinarily huge 'if'...

I'm not saying to you don't try to figure out the answer, but why associate yourself to and support such a hugely flawed and dishonest movie?

How do we build an army to fight all oposition?
We don't have to, if the monetary systems dissapears, all corrupted oldfashined political systems will fade as well, just as the religious institutions just as the bankers and all that greed. Cause they all depend on money and the power that money gives them.

The ZM is not a magic system that will instantly change the world, its us, and how eventually will come to occur, you do know what "gradual change" means right?

You can all keep bith'n to complain about ZM, but so far is just that, complaning. Old Git talks aboout an armed revolution
but how the hell are you going to convince an entire nation to grab their guns?...and against who?...We are all part of this caotic system, therefore WE ALL NEED TO CHANGE IT FROM THE GROUND UP!!, by not supporting and not buying and not voting and not using the money of "their system"

JustG,
'I’m not sure of your ultimate argument there, but I will say this: we are corrupt.

Communism or capitalism doesn’t fail because they are inherently bad, they fail because man corrupts them.'

The argument is from you. Humanity is inherently corrupt, therefore no agency or methodology (eg., ZG)can improve matters. Ie., in principle, we are doomed.

Sorry to get philosophical (no I aint!), but if you are corrupt (as claimed by you), your above opinion is corrupt & untrustworthy.

Or are you saying this? ZG theory for improving human affairs cannot work becos it does not allow for human fallibility. If so, that may be becos ZG is actually not a good theory - it does not incorporate all relevant factors. This is a quite different claim from saying no theory can improve nasty human nature.

"Nice post but it still failed to refute my theory. How will it happen when people like me, the strong willed, stand in the way?"

Actually, as said, Socrates demolished your strong/weak theory 2k+ years ago, followed by a small army of subsequent authorities. Homo sapiens evolved as a social animal. So ZG-style cooperation is not counter to any 'human nature'. OGT

Ok, lets pretend you yourself are 'not' a mindless monkey. How do you suppose those who support ZM could change the world? How do you suppose you will convert not just the religious and the thoughtful, but the politicians armies and banksters? Is there some ZM army determined to rid the earth of all these people who stand in their way?

Back at reality, it's worthless. How can any sane person base their belief system on a 'documentary' filled w/ so many lies? One that has nothing better to offer than some pretty picture of a society where you get everything and don't have to do anything for it. But offers no real or practical solutions?

If you look soundly and logically at the movie, all it has served to do is fracture a portion of the truth movement not just into a philosophy that fits nicely into the NWO, but nto the 'mindless monkeys' you speak of.

Young,
‘Let’s forget about all the giant flaws in the proposed Zeitgeist way of life and focus on one thing. The people. It won’t work because people like me, the strong will not let this happen, we do not want it to happen and since it relys on the cooperation of everyone, it won’t happen. The weak do not want to become the strong, they just want the strong to become the weak, just like them. This documentary is a very clear example of this.’
The strong/weak dichotomy is very old, sub-fascistic, Ayn Rand, nonsense. Socrates sorted this issue out with Callicles over 2k years ago. Human beings are social animals. They cooperate, as do most creatures in the natural world. The idea of universal competition at individual level became popular after Charles Darwin & Herbert Spencer (1850s). It’s simply wrong, unsupported by biology or science. It is discredited old ideological dogs’ vomit.
Of course, Hollywood & John Wayne fans love it; likewise callow youths discovering Nietsche & chest-expanders, & right-wing ignoramuses. OGT

‘The problem is not capitalism, democracy or socialism, the problem is the corruption that lies within. Unless the goal is to remove the corruption, no system will work.’

I’ll go halfway with you only. No ‘ism’ focussed purely on economics will solve the problems we face, agreed. But the core issue is democracy – how we govern ourselves with fairness, freedom, & equality of opportunity. This is an issue of the mechanics of self-government. With IT, we now have the necessary tools.

Corruption is not ‘the’ problem, just one problem. IMHO, like most people, what you call the corruption of capitalism is actually the quite inevitable way uncontrolled capitalism evolves.

From the making & selling of things for profit, it moves into the juggling of money, & pseudo-money, to make illusory profits. The inevitable result is always a bubble bursting & economic collapse. This has been happening since the 18th century, & still we act surprised!?

Capitalism can be dynamic & socially beneficial, but only if it is subject to control by the majority – back to democracy.

If you say corruption in people is the base problem, then we are screwed. We cannot de-corrupt ourselves if we are corrupt. No, but we can devise a system of democracy that adjusts to our natures & deficiencies.

Communism is no more or less ‘natural’ than capitalism. Communism nearly killed Russia, now capitalism is delivering the coup de grace. People are not having children there. They prefer to kill themselves with drink & drugs rather than go on living in a their capitalistic shit-pit. Not becos they are corrupt, but becos they have lost all control over their lives & destinies.

Freedom & democracy are as necessary to people as clean air, food & water. When they lose any hope of ever getting them, they die. And Russia’s imminent fate is the fate of us all. OGT

Let's forget about all the giant flaws in the proposed Zeitgeist way of life and focus on one thing. The people. It won't work because people like me, the strong will not let this happen, we do not want it to happen and since it relys on the cooperation of everyone, it won't happen. The weak do not want to become the strong, they just want the strong to become the weak, just like them. This documentary is a very clear example of this.

OGT: What you want to call capitalism in Russia is no more capitalism than what they called communism. Communism is a fancy ideal, but it's not practical. People are never equal. Never. And the irony is, the people there are worse off under captilism. Not because captilism is bad, but because the system is corrupt.

I find it surprising that so many who support this ZM don't see clearly what is happening. They don't stop and look at who made it and the sources for their information. The ZM is nothing more than a NWO tool plain and simple.

If you look at the goals of the NWO, you'll soon see the ZM goals are the same. And quite frankly, if any wishful thinkers out there believe that those who caused such corruption and torments and hell in the past are not going to do the same in the future, they are mistaken. If you believe that they are just going to change or give up power to some higher ideal, it's delusional.

Their goal is to dominate the world through a one world government scheme of a communist based fascism. If people can't see that happening as we speak, they are certainly not looking.

Their goal is to eliminate anyone who gets in their way and reduce the population.

The goals if the ZM are the same. This so-called eutopia can never happen, not as long as religion and anarchists stand in your way. Look at the new age movement as well. All those people waiting for enlightenment and aliens. Whose fault will it be that their dreamy idiocy is not being fullfilled? Same people. Same people the NWO wants to eliminate.

The sad irony that is zeitgeist is that it has taken a portion of the truth movement and turned them into NWO pawns without them even realizing it.

I'm not saying things don't need to change, but as old bottles corrupt the wine, so too will the old leaders corrupt any system. The problem is not capitalism, democracy or socialism, the problem is the corruption that lies within. Unless the goal is to remove the corruption, no system will work.
JustG

Lolwut,
after 70 years of communism, Soviet Russia collapsed. After about 20 years of capitalism, Russia is dying. Its death rate so far exceeds its birth & survival rate, Russians will cease to exist by about 2050.
Look at the global mess around you & ask yourself whether the two systems serve 'human nature'. Unless we give the new a try (like ZG), we are going down the tube. OGT

Phil,
we've had many strong men (& a few strong women - remember Thatcher?)gripping power firmly in the past. They contributed to the mess we are are in now. They don't work. I might agree with you, ZG is perhaps too naive about the true nature of the evil rats running the show. It will take decisive, revolutionary action to clean them out. Without that revolutionary instrument, the ZG program will remain a pleasant prospect. OGT

TOO... All the doubters of this dreamy movement, and relative to your previous comments to "Phil's".

Yes Z-G is truely a walk along fantasy lane. However, I am educated, with both engineering credentials and a degree in environmental studies. We have with one none renewable resource -oil- and a lot of ingenuity, stretched the population and resource limits of planet earth beyond the breaking point, and crossed more than one point of NO return raping ecological boundaries. As for the econimic system, the rats are finally devouring the last scraps, and shall son turn on the general populous... THEY will not be poor... However, one thing Z-G appears to refuse to awknowledge, is the limits to population growth, relative to exponential demands... and just how does one extinguish the hatred of various religions and other cults. Perhaps we might already have had our Z-G moment, if Adolf Hitler was a bit more wise and benevolent and had successfully invaded Great Britain. Z-G will not occur without a STRONG MAN gripping one and all by the short hairs.

@Phil, you need to do a little more research and look at what zeitgeist is actually saying. The ONE and only thing that it's selling to the lazy and weak is a one world government. The rest is lies and silly wishful thinking.

People like you think you're part of the solution, but you don't realize you are a big part of the problem. You watch part one and ignorantly think it's about time they told the 'truth' about religion. You watch the 2nd and think, oh yea, I'd like to be able to sit on my butt and not do anything and get everything. The movie appeals to a very specific type.

This is not to say anything negative in regards to those who want to see a better world. I've seen many great ideas in this thread. It's simply a statement of truth about the movie and it's ardent supporters.

Phil,
check; the Russian experiment was a catastrophe. I am enthusiastic for self-governing communities, urban or rural. Given modern IT, we don't need big government or armies of bureaucrats. But Amish (?) - you mean back to 19c pre-industrial primitivism? That's not on, really. Science & technology are our allies. We CAN have the best of all worlds. Compassion, yes; there is one basic value - minimising human suffering. Let's get rid of it wherever we can. OGT

No communism did not work, but communalism does. See the Omish Mininites Hutterites etc. Sans the religious doctrin replaced with simple compasion and understanding for the Human condition, and you have zeitgeist.

Young,
your reccos & points noted.
Personal abstentions from the consumerist rat-race are just that, personal choices, a bit like religious beliefs IMHO. They have little mass or political impact.
For real change, we need to reform our system utterly. Just like a snake outgrows its old skin, it's time to shed the ancient crapola that keeps humanity in semi-misery. The starting point must be the global banking system. It controls all resources as a macro protection racket.
Sorry & all that, but that means a stiff fight, a revolution, & probably violence. The gangsters who killed tens of thousands to steal Iraqi oil make the terms of the game, not poor schmucks like me.
But finally, we billions are the stronger. The few are cunning & ruthless, but ultimately weak. OGT

Some ideas I had for policy change are listed about 10 comments above. Albeit I don't think they will actually happen.

The best thing I think I could do personally is advise. I'm a problem finder not a problem solver. I've always had a talent for spotting holes, contradictions, similarities, assumptions as well as a talent at analogies to help put it in perspective.

agreed! so what do you want to do, how will you change it and what is it your doing to change a situation in which you want to see change. i believe the same thing you do...you can't change a society in the blink of an eye, it takes vision, dreams and understanding and having the knowledge to create the vision and dream. what do you want to do, in your life in a facet of what you feel drawn to that will allow you to make a difference.

One more thing, it's really funny how similar we are. It seems that the only thing that divides us our views on this movement.

I have voted once in my life and that was for my district councilor who was my next door neighbor. That was when I was 18 and I'm 24 now. The reason I don't vote is not because I think elections are a fraud but because I value my vote to much to give it to anyone who isn't on par with my social and policy making views. You have a right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you. That statement says to me that if you vote then you are in part responsible for our social conditions and cancels out the argument "You can't complain if you don't vote". Wrong, it's the other way around. George Carlin does an excellent bit on this.

Your getting less and less attached to o the social grid by not buying unnecessary products and services? Dude, your preaching to the choir here. I recently liquefied most of my clothes, all of my Cd's and dvd's as well as other unnecessary "baggage" on eBay, as well as making some donating my x-box and other entertainment electronics to local charities. I didn't do this for any political reason but instead because I literally feel the weight of this sh!t on my back. To quote Fight Club - "It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything." Also, I live, work and go to school in 3 different provinces so I can't drag all this crap around with me. The less I have the more I gain.

Zeitgeist and The Venus Project are causes with a spectacular vision that come from noble motivations, but I don't believe they are practical. But I am aware of why they have gained such a following and think that this energy would be much spent much better on trying to reach achievable goals.

It seems we are doomed to destroy society, rebuild, then repeat. This has happened time and time again, I also believe it would happen if we tried the system Zeitgeist proposes, except on a much grander scale.

A good analogy is our current traffic conditions. There are many many crashes happening all the time, the system allows these mistakes. Imagine if we were to have a traffic system with cars driven by computers all working harmoniously together. Imagine this system works perfectly with no crashes ever happening. Then suddenly, something fails, just one car malfunctions, and this causes the entire system to crash. Now their are massive deaths and no one can get anywhere and everything comes to a stand still.

Do you see why a system that allows failure is better than one designed not to? Small failures are better than complete failure. Any thoughts?

The fact that you have prior knowledge of how humans perceive risk and how this applies to today's society only makes me recommend the book to you even more.

Although your geographic and financial circumstances may not allow you to get it now, please keep it in mind for the future. It's by a Canadian author and I think a Canadian publisher so it may not even be available in retail stores in the US but if you ever get a chance to get your hands on it, do it. You won't regret it.

Your comment was moderated because of the link you posted so I didn't see it until now. I actually have already watched that documentary, the system needs to change dramatically I agree 110% on that but please don't take everything suggested in "NAC" as fact. I believe that it's the people who are responsible more so than the system itself.

The elitist hierarchies that run our world need to be made an example of so that our future elected officials will know not to F with the people. Its a little naive of a statement I know. I tink drastic reforms would be much better than switching to a "resource based economy".

What many fail to understand is that a resource based economy would essentially be the exact same thing we have know. Certain resources would be more abundant than others so the computers that make our decisions would hold them up at a higher value, basically their would still be currency, but it wouldn't be represented by physical money.

One observation I have made regarding the movement and the Venus project is that they preach the scientific method of reasoning but do not follow it. Because to follow it you must always second guess yourself, question your self, and admit that you may have wasted a lot of time if not your whole life devoted to something which doesn't work. This becomes very apparent once you look into the venus projects founder.

Don't let my comments distract you, I recommend that you read every comment posted on this board from the beginning, some very bright people made some very good observations.

Young,
'I recommend you get the book “Risk – The Science and Politics of Fear”. It’s excellent page turner on how our cave man brains shape the way we live in this complex society.'

Thanks, an important point, altho I'm too poor & isolated to buy or borrow books. I've covered our human addiction to risk elsewhere. I believe it was/is a powerful factor in driving our species outwards & onwards. As you suggest, it was obviously implanted deep in our genotype in our formative years, altho cave-dwelling was only a limited part of that. Indeed! Why else is gambling the largest business for turnover in the USA? And why is tourism so popular? Becos we are incorrigibly dissatisfied ramblers & gamblers at heart. You have to first know that if you want to change it. OGT

My brother in law orders a super sized meal every time he goes to McDonald's but I have not once seen him finish his giant fries or drink. Wouldn't this constitute greed. He wants more than he needs. If it all comes down to behavior would it not be rational to think he would stop ordering these large amounts of food based on the fact he never finishes them?

Nice observation with the adrenaline rush. But I wasn't referring to the thrill itself as human nature but rather the need for that thrill.

(Hahaha, gosh thanks man, your an ace commenter!!) I think you may have a rather large ego. I meant "you" in the figuritive sense not the literal. Just because someone doesn't have the answer doesn't mean they can't ask the question. Responses like "Many people complaint and critisize the ZM ideas, but nobody yet has come with even better ideas" shows weakness in your critical thinking skills.

"you cannot simply discard everything they propose just because you disliked some of their beliefs."

When all the information after a certain point is based on an assumption, and it turns out that assumption is wrong, you must discard that information.

"Do you believe in God".

Irrelevant question. I'm guessing it's loaded. I'm guessing your waiting for me to say "Yes" and then bombard me with a shitload of information. BUT, these are assumptions and if that assumption is wrong then I must discard those ideas.

Check out the comment section for "The Enemies of Reason" for "young" and "allan" comments to find the answer to that question.

@OGT

I recommend you get the book "Risk - The Science and Politics of Fear". It's excellent page turner on how our cave man brains shape the way we live in this complex society.

I know I´m just wasting my time by answering you, but I just couldn´t resist after reading your type of comments like this one: Quote:

¨I view myself sort of like the social police. I am not here to help you do better or offer solutions but rather to bust you when I catch you up to no good.¨

(Hahaha, gosh thanks man, your an ace commenter!!)

And yes I´ve been in a few fights in the past and also felt the thrill of violence, BUT YOUR mistake is to believe that this ¨thrill of violence¨is ¨human nature¨, its NOT, that was merely the result of an adrenaline release, and it does feel ¨good¨ to get rid of some stress while excercizing or punching a sand bag.

So you are basically mistaken a chemical reaction to a human reaction or behavior.

Anyway, of course these ZM people are wrong in many of their assumptions, but the important thing is to use what you think is useful for you, you cannot simply discard everything they propose just because you disliked some of their beliefs.

I see this movement as a WHOLE, and not as thousands of separated crazy people or ideas. It doesn´t matter what they say, what matters is what I actually do to change my environment, how I will contribute to stop this human and environmental massacre.

WE can bluff and brag for our beliefs on internet forums like this one, but if we don´t actually contribute with actions to really make a difference then its really useless.

Young,
phew! A very big arena of discussion, human nature. But you are right; we must have some ideas, since we cannot be sure what we are capable of, or not capable of, until we have some fairly firm notions. Too much for this post, but the evidence seems clear that we sapiens were formed psychically in our paleolithic, nomad, wandering days. That is about 90% of our history. We have next to nothing in way of records of those 100k-odd years, but I think we can use modern, recorded history to extrapolate back. That evidence is not clear, but fairly reliable. Conclusions: we are unstable mixtures of great abilities, for cooperation & conflict. This dynamic instability was like a nuclear core that gave us the energy to expand & conquer all & every habitat, & all & every other species. Now we have the power to create our own habitats. In parallel, we also have the power to destroy ourselves & all habitats. Knowing this is the beginning of the wisdom necessary to save our world. Unhelpful is the 'Walt Disney' picture of ourselves as noble savages, fallen from grace - if only distorting factors A, B, or C, are eliminated, we will revert back 'naturally' to normative, cooperative, peace-loving harmony with all nature: a nonsense, & dangerous, self-deluding, sentimental nonsense.

I agree that human nature is a vague concept. What I view as human nature would be traits which every human has from the time of birth until the time of death. Example, again, would be our reaction when someone suddenly scares us. We do not think and make the decision to gasp and jump back and have our heart rate increase, we just do it.

Venus denies the existence of these common traits. I have emailed the founder many times and told him that if he can explain this to me in a fashion which fits his theory that we only have learned behavior that I would not only join and participate in the movement, but donate to it.

Not saying that he is avoiding the question, he's probably a really busy guy and I wouldn't be surprised if those emails have never even been opened.

What is human nature is not the question. Is there human nature is the question, and I think it would be very hard to find a sociologist or anthropologist or psychologist who is respected among his colleagues that denies the existence of such.

Young,
‘This is human nature. Yes, their is such a thing. Every social scientist, psychologist will tell you that.’

No they won’t, Young, not if they are informed & honest. The nature of ‘human nature’ is a hotly-contested topic, across the whole spectrum of hard-to-soft sciences. Yours is a populist version. It is a belief as widespread as it is unproven.

Granted, the ‘Venus’ version is equally naïve. It seems to be based on studies of Amazonian tribes. We really have no great basis for believing that this remnant minority represents our nomad ancestors – us as we were for 90% of human history. That’s where human nature was established. Trouble is, we have very little evidence from that distant prehistoric era, so we are not sure what ‘human nature’ actually is.

"Many people complaint and criticize the ZM ideas, but nobody yet has come with even better ideas"

I view myself sort of like the social police. I am not here to help you do better or offer solutions but rather to bust you when I catch you up to no good.

If you read my above statement about being scared, then you'll realize that it is a reaction which is pre-disposed in everyone of us. It is not learned behavior. Their are hundreds examples of this which Jacque denies the existence of. He quotes Einstein(out of context) as if he was a social scientist.

Have you ever been in a fight? Or rather,have you every beaten someone up? Felt the thrill of violence while you bash someones face in? I have, a lot of people have. It's an obsolete male instinct but the fact that it is obsolete in the context of todays world does not mean that it doesn't exist and we can condition every living human on earth not to participate in such violence. This is human nature. Yes, their is such a thing. Every social scientist, psychologist will tell you that.

He doesn't even offer a real theory on how this would work. Every time he is asked he alludes to technology which does not exist and then starts to play your desires of a perfect world like dangling a piece of meat in front of a dog.

Free yourself from this garbage brother. Your smarter then this. I know your angry at the world and don't think it's fair, but this ain't the answer.

Neither 50 nor 100 nor 1000 years ago the monetary system has been fair, except of course for those in power.

Money has been around for thousands of years and has been used by many worldwide leaders to build their armys to enlarge their empires, just to feed their egos and to embrace an insatiable greed for more. Which is exactly why all empires have fall.

But of course its always easier to critisize someone with a radical idea for the fear of risking the things we "think" we have or own. our false sense of security and confort, our selfish idea of ownership and of course the incredibly dumb belief in "democracy"

Many people complaint and critisize the ZM ideas, but nobody yet has come with even better ideas, most just hold on to the same oldfashioned ways that they are familiar with.

These ZM people admit that there is no such thing as the "truth", cause the "truth" is emergent and NOT permanent, this means that we ALL can come up with even better ideas than theirs while admiting that our outdated political, monetary and religious systems have to be abolished if we really want to better our lives.

You cannot make anybody play by ¨the rules¨ in a monetary system, simply because the rules can be bent or manipulated by those with more power than others. Therefore you will not make any corporate leader dip his feet in socialism or any other form of control.

Capitalism, socialism, free enterprise and all traditional forms of politics are just different ways to handle the money of the state, but again, money creates, promotes and awards corruption in all levels, as well as crime in all levels. So it´s an endless loophole.

The problem I have with Zeitgeist is as I stated before, it's not based on human behavior, it holds us up to an impossible ideal.

I'm a socialist by nature, but I don't think that system can work because of the same reasons.

The system I would like to move towards would still be capitalism, because the companies would be owned privately, but would dip its feet in socialism, with the government giving financial incentives (tax cuts) to companies to make their interests sway towards higher employment.

The biggest problem with today's model of capitalism is that the interests of the workers and the interests of the companies are in conflict. Somehow they need to become parallel.

So basically my system would be..."You wanna do business here? Fine. But your going to play by our rules."

Wow, you really blew my mind there, I was expecting something in the lines of 'deregulate, deregulate, deregulate' using different words.

I agree on your points completely (or atleast the line your drawing), and I can't see how these changes can be viewed in any other way than revolutionary.

"Capitalism is an economic system where capital and land, the non-labor factors of production (also known as the means of production), are privately owned; labor, goods and resources are traded in markets; and profit, is distributed to the owners invested in technologies and industries."

In my world the 'free market' is tightly woven into capitalism, with a goal of having nothing regulated by government (i.e. the people). We must have completely different views on what capitalism is and strives for.

In my world, the suggestions you put forward is a whole lot closer to communism/socialism than capitalism. The end goal of communism is releasing the power completely to the workers, with no interference from either state or 'big business' private interest. Socialism strives for redistributing wealth to those without it using a state wide control of the wealth.

Allan Young,
trying, & failing, not to be patronizing, I take your points & proposals. Most are sound, but you seem not to see that the more radical would be utterly impossible (impractical) w/out a revolutionary change to our political power system.

Eg., abolish income tax? Sure, but most of that goes as a kind of protection money to the big banks – so the eternal ‘national debt’. As Zeitgeist says, ALL MONEY IN CIRCULATION IS DEBT (not really shouting!).

Under the present deficit banking system, if we abolish debt, we remove all money from circulation. We can do this, if, & only if, we break the power of the banks. And they have global power. They control governments & have major political parties in the palms of their hands. These chalk-striped rats are backed by police & armies.

I hope you see the scale of the problem. Only revolution can solve it, which means replacement with something completely new. The street-fighting nonsense is very 19c – real revolutions happen when a critical mass of minds changes, then people shrug off the old, worn-out system like a ragged coat.

Sure, some things have ‘got better’, but that is offset by the terrible threat of the imminent collapse of all that humanity has built up. Zeitgeist is correct about the urgency of taking radical action now, before it is too late. We have wasted decades when we could have taken wise action. We didn’t do it. So now the survival choice is forced upon us – revolution or mass extinction.

‘Young’ by name or nature; sorry, you don’t not got no time left for itsy-bitsy reforms. We of the older generation stole your future time. We burned it up in exchange for a selfish orgy of brainless consumerism. The least we can do is warn you, & apologize. OGT

Judging by your previous comments you are a very educated and intelligent man and I'm sure you've read many books. Please accept my apologies in regards to the patronizing feel off my follow up comment and please allow me to retort.

Young is my last name and Allan my first and I post under both and you may remember some off my previous comments with the argument that life is better now not worse. I'm sure a man as educated as you would recognize that conditions for those in modern western civilization are nowhere close to as bad as they were for a society on the brink of revolution, for example let's say the french revolution. For this reason I don't expect to see a revolution anytime soon.

"if you were as old as me, & read & seen as much history, you would know about the stream of fixes & reforms that have come & gone over many years. They made no big difference."

I agree, but they have made SOME difference. Sometimes good sometimes bad, and that's why I say "evolution as opposed to revolution". Theirs no quick fixes in today's world and were going to have to work hard for change but I believe it is imminent. This change may get worse for the next generation but that just may be the price to pay for a valuable lesson. Not that I believe any of the "practical" solutions I proposed would happen anytime soon ,if ever, but I think they are much more practical to what is proposed in Zeitgeist.

I like that your "to old to care". It reminds me of something George Carlin said - "Humans are only interesting from birth until a year and a half, they don't get interesting again until about the age of 50. By then they're either completely defeated and beaten down by the world that it's interesting, or they've figured out a way to beat the world and that's interesting too."

I don't feel like making a highly detailed organized list but I'll throw a few idea's out.

1, Abolish income tax.

2, Higher tax on higher profits.

3, Tighter financial regulation of provincial/state resources.

4, Abolish interest on lending.

5, Third party investigation on how "aid" money is used.

6, Legalization and regulation of Cannabis, as well as investigation into the possibility of legalizing "harder" drugs.

7, Legalization of prostitution.

8, Mandatory benefits for those who work for companies which make a certain profit margin and percentage. i.e, MacDonald's & Wal - Mart.

9, Pull out of NAFTA.

10, Pull out of any wars/nation building missions.

11, Tight regulations and restrictions on the quality of food that is produced within the nation.

12, National boycott of every product from any company which exploits workers and violates human rights.

13, Tax cuts to companies which have a high employee to profit ratio. (The more employee's you have compared to the profit you make.)

14, Higher wages for public servants.

15, Tight regulation on every industry big enough to have a significant impact on the nations quality of life if such industry collapsed.

16, Tax cuts to companies which use union workers.

That's just a few off the top off my head. I know they are very vague descriptions but what do you expect this is just a comment board. So please don't attack to hard with assumptions on why these idea's wouldn't work, other than that I'm interested to hear what you think and what you may have to add.

May I ask you what some of your PRACTICAL ways of improving this system (or ideas of a whole new system) are?

(I'm not asking you for a solution to the problem, I don't expect any one human to have a solution, but you're coming down so hard on this idea I take it for granted you atleast have some kind of ideas or general conceptions on how to change for the better)

Young,
if you were as old as me, & read & seen as much history, you would know about the stream of fixes & reforms that have come & gone over many years. They made no big difference. The post-WWII reforms giving better social services in the West, & shorter work hours, are being rolled back. The basic deficit banking system cannot be repaired. It is rotten thru & thru. It does not even make sense as arithmetic. I'm too old to worry for myself, but if you are young enuf to have a future, you should worry. Things are not only getting worse, they are falling apart. Note the 'Great White Hope' Obama. He came into power promising to end the wars. So he extends them worldwide. He & the system could not even deliver a fair healthcare system. Give him time? Sure, enuf time & we are all dead. OGT

If you read a history book you would realize things ARE getting better. How do you know what my solutions are and why are you so quick to jump to conclusions of revolution, that's all I see you talking about on here. Are you trying to start a revolt from your computer chair? Evolution not revolution that's what I say. If you think the people of the west are anywhere close to being that upset with their lives that they will start a revolution then you a very very highly mistaken sir, GET REAL! Take a look at a history book, look at how far people are pushed before they revolt. Yes I watched and understood these movies and all I saw were giant holes and contradictions so if you expect me to believe things are going to get worse based on this piece of filth film then you aren't worth the time it takes to write this comment.

"What your PRACTICAL adjective means is you want some way to patch up the present system without any major changes."

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Oh man, I literally lol'd when I read this. Anybody that knows me would laugh their head off if they heard a comment like that directed towards my beliefs on how change will be achieved.

Nico Siete,
we can learn a lot from animals & nature: no, everything! One lesson is, nature is hard but neutral. Unlike the animals, humankind has the unique power to construct its own environments for survival. We use our god-like powers to survive, or nature will eliminate us. It's that simple. When enuf minds decide on survival, not mass suicide, then the massively powerful mechanisms at our disposal will swing into action. Revolutions are made by changing consciousness, not by the material re-distribution schemas advocated by the obsolete 'isms' of yesteryear. The future begins with dreams, or we will walk thru our present living nightmare to the bitter end. OGT

As I read the opinions on this movement, my heart sinks to know that as humans we are collectively so shallow. I've read opinions from many very bright minds. The thing that concerns me is that we, by we I mean mankind,cannot fathom a world as described by the founders of this movement. Nothing in this world is fool proof. Nothing is perfect. However this is such a leap from the animals we are now that we can hardly imagine it.
I live in the country and have had, and watched horses for many years. A horse is not very far removed from man, even though we would like to think so. A horse in his quest to instill his will over others will injure himself severely. I have seen them close to death to protect what they deem "theirs". I watch them desimate the land around them in the quest to survive. All the while wasting vast amounts of energy trying to dominate or keep from being dominated. I am sad to say I've lived that way most of my life,if I will be honest with myself.
I wish man could evolve enough to see that a system similar to this is the ONLY chance for survival of the species. I personally believe we can't. Yet I still cling to the dream that John Lennons' simple little song Imagine can somehow come true.

Young,
if you watched the Zeitgeist movies & understood them, you would know that 'things' are not going to improve with time. They are going to get a helluva lot worse. We are talking about a global economic & environmental disaster. Human civilization may not survive. Billions may die. These things are what the signs & evidence are clearly telling us. What your PRACTICAL adjective means is you want some way to patch up the present system without any major changes. This is impossible. At the diseased heart of our present system is a parasitic banking racket that has bled the world white. It has destroyed ecosystems & delivered wars. We must wipe it away with revolution, or we will be wiped away. And please spare me crapola about revolutions being 'violent'. Hundreds of thousands of innocents have been massacred in Iraq & Iran - 'peace' banker-style.

I appreciate the society and culture in which I am a part but I definitely believe that it can and will improve as time goes on. The major difference between my views and the views of those who support this "movement" is that I would like to find PRACTICAL ways to make our lives better.

Personally I do love the society we are suppose to have. I believe in a social democracy, but we only have the illusion of that. However, for my part in these comments, I have no interest in discussing the solution to the worlds problems here.

What I have here is a real problem with a completely agenda driven 'documentary' that has the sole intention of leading people into ignorance and destruction.

What do you suppose they are going to recommend happen to all those fighting this so-called eutopia? What do you suppose the new agers are going to think as they keep getting told 'it's the fault of those who refuse to transcend that you haven't achieved a new plane of existence? Etc etc.

Don't you know they demonized the Jews in Germany too once. Locked them up and killed them for the good of society.

Can you see the danger in this? That IS a real issue that should be discussed in the face of propaganda such as this.

I think i find this comment section more interesting and infomative then the doc, hahaha. lots of people debating lots of points...but i think ultimatly what the point of this doc and the movement is, to me! at least. is that we don't have to live the way we do...most every comment on here is either for nature, nurture. communisum. and why the venus project rocks...why not think of something else? it's cool that lots of people are for this movement but the people who are against it....do you really love the society you live in today?...really?

Why would you not want to change it?...the idea that most of the poeple here will never see the full scale of a new societal sturture is true but they are willing to invest there lives in it for a better world...do you really think life is ment just to live frivolously? do what makes you feel good and die...really? why would you not want to make a difference, make change...for someone else. because one lives only for themselfs and instant satisfaction of ones life? "oh well i'm happy with my stuff and what i've accumulated with my life so i can die now."

To me...and this is just me. but the true measure of ones life will only ever be ones actions and how their "energy" has effected the world and change they have created. that's it. in point. our current society is useless, very very useless. we are backwards and very confused as a conscious being because we are bombarded by lots of rediculous views and ideas...also, the hole nature vs nurture thing...the subjects that are used in these experiments are products of nurture, society...so how can you even use them as a control in a test? they are tainted. only an infant could be used, really! that is the most basic untouched moment of human nature. all other things are aquried, are they not?...were tests done on tribes in the middle of the jungle, on peace loving mayan decented cultures that live in secluded areas of central america, who have nothing and are extremely happy and possitive about everything....have they?

Anyone read a book about those cultures human nature? pretty much our current society is really messed up, most societys all over the world are because of a mulitude of reasons but why would you not want to change that...why would you just say can't happen cuz of this, or i don't see it ever comming because of that...why don't you say, i like the idea in this doc but here's my idea of how it would work better, or how it can be stronger, more effecient, more open...anything!!! why hate on a great idea? because you are conditiond already to think this is it? don't be a dink, be it a dink for the venus project or a dink for capitialism....just think. for yourself. AND MAKE CHANGE HAPPEN!!! ONLY YOU CAN DO THAT!!! man!

I have no interest in a so-called 'eutopian' 1 world communist existence. There can be no Eutopia, only the propaganda meant to make people think that it can exist and embrace world communism without even realizing it.

after you all watched this then google zeitguist debunked ,it completeley shows zeitguist to be a fraud with a sinister guys and a certain goverment agenda to new ageism and we know whos behind the isms or behind it. so youtube or google zeitguist debunked final version

I'd advise not to take Darwin as a guide. His theory was in trouble from its invention. Today it is crumbling. Try Perry Marshall's site. Animal & human life is marked by high degrees of cooperation & mutual support, as well as competition. The idea of every living creature being in a struggle with every other is a perverted ideology of capitalism. We must transcend finance capitalism or perish. OGT

*sigh*
Human nature? How about nature in general?
Any living animal, humans included, have a natural propensity towards greed, gluttony, and lust. just ask your good buddy Darwin. Just because a person has every thing they need, what would stop them from wanting more?

While I'll grant that lesser crimes like assault and theft would decrease by as much as say... 90%, that wouldn't account for the 10% of cases where mother nature (or god, if you like that better) simply fcks up (for example picture a mother cat eating her litter of kittens, or a cow refusing to let her calf suckle). These sorts of defects happen in humans as well, and with no human input how will these cases be handled?

after watching the three films (Zeitgiest, Addendum, and this one)i get the distinct impression that this may have been a decent idea that got hijacked n fast-tracked by larger interest

Gregory Smith,
sure, if imperfect people didn't make problems, the world would be a problem-free place. Gregory, I'm certain you mean well, but please think a bit. The task is to invent a scheme of things that fits people as they actually are. How on earth can we change 6 billion people? How long would it take? How much time do you think we have? We've had religion for thousands of years, & various political 'isms' in modern times. These failures made the mess we see today. We need new thinking. OGT

Were people to cease clinging to the false notions of "I" and "mine," (the ego) the world would be at peace and the need for social change through technology and engineering would be moot.

A mind free of the false notions of "I" and "mine" would know the world with truth-discerning awareness, would not suffer and would not and could not abet the suffering of others.

That there is "absolutely nothing in the world worth clinging to" is the pure heart and core of Buddhism.

The Zeitgeist Movement is the result of enlightened minds that naturally seek to enlighten the society in which they find themselves. The elimination of scarcity via technology and engineering is the natural and normal course of action any undisturbed (enlightened) mind would take(it's a no-brainer).

Further, money is an artificial contrivance that is not necessary to either motivate one to better oneself nor to conduct 'busyness' with others. We do things, work with others and make agreements with others on a daily basis without regard to monetary transactions. Most transactions are social transactions we do out of mutual respect and for reciprocal, but different types of support. This is what goes on between you and your family, friends and colleagues every day.
It takes a bit of imagination to see this type of transaction expanded to conduct the 'busyness' of building homes, apartments, factories and power plants, and acquiring food and clothing, but examples exist.

And Please! Do not tell me that everything will be the same for everyone! Some people like big rooms, some like them small. Some don't want to be confined to any room at all. Some like it up high. Some like it down low. Some like the ocean, some like the mountain. Some like cities, others like the country. Don't talk about 'round cities' with artificially created sameness for everyone. That is not what this is about.

What we are talking about is a change of mind, far more than a change of environment.

Pretty pictures of futuristic cities appeals to the materialistic mindset that we seek to change. It is good marketing, but it isn't the goal, it is a natural outcome of the goal. The goal is enlightenment.

-I like technology and utopia and happiness and all that, but due to the wording of the argument in this "doc" (pitch?), I think and feel that I am being sold to.
If I am being sold to, then by whom and what is the price?

-The technicians will be the *elite*, so how will they benefit above or differently than everyone else? (I know the "doc" said altruism, but...)

-Since this information is so readily available and so easily answers today's problems, could this be an attempt by the *now elite* to stem or stop a revolution?

In any case, logically speaking, if I don't want other PEOPLE making decisions and taking responsibility for me, then why would I want COMPUTERS to do it? There had better be an opt-out button...

Stop arguing and debating over this. It is doing nothing progressive whatsoever. Put these theories into action and let us see if they work. If they do not then go back to the drawing board and try again. We must do something and at the moment this is our best option. Our survival depends on change, drastic change and unless it happens then we are simply going to be another species on the extinction list.

Slipfeed,
many of our humankind are undoubtedly flawed, incorrigibly individualistic, greedy, & full of sinfulness. But cheer up, you pessimistic old thing, others are diamond geezers. That's why we have democracy. If we were angels & all alike, all we would need would be efficient organizing, as in an ant-heap. Boring too, eh?

Don George,
not sure who your remarks are aimed at. If me & my Desktop Democracy notions, I can answer. DD is not communism since it involves the elimination of the state machine. Communities govern themselves. There are just citizens, no barrier or gap between governed & governers.
Buckingham Palace? Invite suggestions & desktop discussion. List the options, then ask people what they want to do with Buck House, & they vote. If it turns out a bad decision, no problem. People will sqwawk on the internet, & we can have another vote. So simple; people will have the time since work will take a max of 3 days a week.
Bill Gates works 7 days a week? Course he does, becos he chooses his work. He loves his work, so it isn't work, it's a delight! Let's have that for everyone.
It's happening already. Countless volunteers now give their time & efforts freely to charities - no pay, no medals, becos people have souls & they love helping others.
No-one paid Einstein to produce E=MC2. It is a perverted idea of capitalsim that people will only move if they are bribed with wages or threatened with the stick of poverty.
Inefficient, a hopeless dream? Look at history. Each time society advanced & people got more free time, productivity leaped ahead. Long work hours are a mark of waste & inefficiency.
Social wage NOW: let's live life; roll on the revolution!

Where there is more than one man, one man will believe himself the others master.

Where there is a man that believes himself the others master there is entitlement.

Where there is entitlement there is hoarding of resources for personal benefit.

Where there is a system there is a flaw.

Where there is a flaw there is a way to use that flaw to exploit the system for personal benefit.

A flawless system does not exist and cannot be created.

In short, the failings you site in this movement are not failings of the system, but failings of man kind itself. No reconstruction of any system built by man for man will ever succeed in achieving the goals you have outlined where a man is involved, either in it's construction or use.

I'm sorry. Mankind is simply and unequivocally flawed on a fundamental level, and destined to be the harbinger of it's own destruction.

So, the machines decide what I need? Let's say I want the Queen of England's castle. I want to live there. So, I go, and it's mine, right? Then, a million other people come and want to live there. Who gets to stay? Do the machines decide? What are my needs? Do I get to decide, or do the machines? I think I need an ocean liner. Am I wrong? I think I need a gold-plated jacket. Do I get it? Why not? What if I kill someone for a gold jacket? Then, I'll be given therapy and "re-educated" so I won't want this kind of thing anymore. I get it. 1984. Who will volunteer to work 18 hours a day 7 days a week like Steve Jobs or Bill Gates did to deliver something wonderful for the world? If I get things without working, I'll only work if I love it. And, I'll only work a little bit, so I can spend the rest of my time riding my desert bike, and racing in my Nascar. Yes, I agree, harness the machines to help the people, but don't underestimate the problems you'll have with your machine utopia.

Who decides all this? I assume the state. What you've described is just communism. It's been tried. The only society that worked using this model is the kibbuzim of Israel, and even they have now finally broken down into capitalistic models. I agree that capitalism is deeply flawed, and somewhat for the reasons you state. But replacing the "Invisible Hand" of capitalism with human central planning always leads to cruel dictatorships, and human suffering. If you can combine capitalism with your model, perhaps you've got something.

Vlatko & Smith,
I wonder if you ever saw the old 'Shape of Things to Come' movie? It was based on the HG Wells' book. It might give Zeitgeist fans some things to think about. It too proposed rule by a scientific/technological elite. HG Wells was a member of the London 'Round Table' think-tank, backed by Cecil Rhodes & Rothschild geld. It inspired the Council for Foreign Relations (CFR)in the USA. These boys want a world run by billionaire 'elitists' like themselves. Cecil Rhodes set up the Rhodes Scholarship scheme to train bright young minds from around the world in the NWO way of thinking. Bill Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar.
If you want to avoid an autocracy run by these aristocratic mafiosi, fix your mind on the vital necessity of democratic control. Alternatives have been tried & found very nasty.

I think its interesting to discover in how many places the Zeitgeist content is on...I'm also curious as to why such a non-historical, neo-nazi, New Age, Theosophical religous propangada is so freely available and is even allowed...

political power systems & economic systems are intimately inter-related. US democracy appeared as a result of a long sequence of historical developments. It was no accident.
Slavery fell becos it was a poor performer economically & politically. Likewise feudal serfdom. Eg., Islam beat off the Crusades becos every Moslem was free, not a serf. Those with a stake in the system fight better - something the fading US empire is finding as it turns more & more to hired mercenaries.
If I repeat myself, apologies, but people do not choose revolution. The crises come whether we choose them or not, as now.
The possibility of a higher form of democracy has been presented to us by history, with the development of IT networks. It's up to us to seize that opportunity or not. IT for the first time in history gives us the tools to eliminate remote elected representatives, remote government, & remote bureaucracies. Grass-roots, self-government is now a feasible option. Its necessary corollary is a 3-day work-week & social wage for all. Money is NOT a problem, nor production. The latter is now done by automated factories & systems.
200 years of science & technology have eliminated much human donkey power from production. That leaves an awful lot of unemployed. A grassroots democracy can use those redundant people in the provision of non-productive, labor-intensive support & social services - to the benefit of all. Work can be voluntary, in harness with professionals & experts. Work can be play! Life can be free & fun!
Wanna sit on your butt all day & watch daytime TV? No problem: wanna join a team to send tractors to Africa? No problem, sign up here. What can you offer? What do you want to do? Do you want on-the-job-training or education? No problem! You're too old to mow the grass, cook your own food? Hey, we got plenty of people can help you. They'll also come round, drink beer, & talk over old times, if you want. Maybe you can come & tell the young kids about the bad old days?
Some people find the idea that their lives are shaped by the limits of their dreams, frightening. Ultimately, it's true.

I’d like to discuss the ‘Greed’ issue that has been brought up against the zeitgeist movement. First of greed is not an inherit quality in humans, at least there is not a whole of support for that at all. We know that in societies where greed is rewarded, societies like ours, it will of course manifest it self. The degree to which it manifest itself is course dependent upon how greatly greed is rewarded. But human evolved to exist together, to work together to cooperate.

Not true, we evolved to be hunter gatherers, we have been CONDITIONED to work as a group. The gathering part of our instinct is what creates greed. If we didn't have the mentality to get as much as possible even when we have enough already, we would have never survived.

I'm not saying anything about the state of democracy or values there in. All I'm saying is that democracy not a economic system in and of it self. You can make economic decisions with a democratic system, and there by influencing the economic system. That is how we have (Americans) regulated our economic system. But we do not have a democratic economic system because so such system exists. As to what exactly our economic system is, that appears to be highly debatable.

"Democracy works. It has proved itself the best system."

That statement is so subjective, its purely opinion. The pros and cons of democracy have been debated by great minds since its conception in antiquity. The only that democracy has proved in my opinion is that it is quit easily corrupted, which I think you would agree with.
You said democracy proved itself the best, how has it done this? What is so great about democracy, not that I'm attacking it I'm just interested to know why Americans, (and I'm assuming you're American) value democracy so highly.

I've never heard God in a democracy. vox populi,vox populi.

Higher level of democracy you say? Sounds interesting. Do you have ideas as to what that entails?

we need a revolution ,big time.
but it seems to me that too many people are afraid of the government . and they cant admit it. so they have put the government in the roll of the protector. i can see how this is taking away a lot of your "god given" rites. can you honestly say over the past 10 years 20 years even 30 years that this government is being run "by the people, for the people"? and we have given these freedoms up by our own viewision. some who just don't care some who care only about getting by every day and still others who think only the guys up on the hill know whats best for us. yes we need a big shift in thinking

Some Guy,
"I also read democracy in reference to an economic system, this is not true. Democracy is a decision making system nothing more. It can be used to influence an economic system but it can never be one."

Not so; vox populi, vox dei. The secret of America's economic dynamism was democracy. Democracy released an explosion of inventive & productive creativity. No, it wasn't prairie wheat, or Eli Whotsit's cotton gin: it was democracy. Democracy was America's energy, heart & soul. Democracy works. It has proved itself the best system. Sadly, the 18c Constitution has been suborned, worn old & feeble by time. Too bad! Time for a better, higher system of democracy. Zeitgeist misleads people by its apolitical illusions. Democracy arrives by revolution, not pacifist abnegation. You fight for equal opportunity, or you slip back into slavery. This is happening now. Give me freedom, or give me death! Roll on the revolution!

This had some of the most interesting conversations I've ever read online! :)

I'd like to discuss the 'Greed' issue that has been brought up against the zeitgeist movement. First of greed is not an inherit quality in humans, at least there is not a whole of support for that at all. We know that in societies where greed is rewarded, societies like ours, it will of course manifest it self. The degree to which it manifest itself is course dependent upon how greatly greed is rewarded. But human evolved to exist together, to work together to cooperate. Our survival has always been dependent upon our ability to cooperate and share. This quality, not greed, is about the only quality that can be found in all human cultures. If greater outlets were around to reward cooperation instead of competition then this may be more apparent to us.

I also read democracy in reference to an economic system, this is not true. Democracy is a decision making system nothing more. It can be used to influence an economic system but it can never be one.

Someone also remarked that the Venus project would be a sort of A.I. dictatorship. I don't think it has to be that way. A computer can be programed with all sorts of limitations. These limitations can reflect a value system for instance the good old law of 'thou shall not kill'(humans). Now this decision making computer, A.I. is bound by this law which we programed into it and all decision that it will make will also be bound to this law. In a way a Bill of Rights can be programed into the decision making computer and that's something that can be overseen and enforced by the humans supervising the computers upkeep. We are the creators of this technology, we can create it in accordance with any value system we wish. I would also like to point out that the documentary was correct when it stated that computer already make a lot of our decisions. I think that to be a gross understatement; they make a lot more than we like to admit.

@Dr. Dunkleosteus
Ignorance is bliss right? It fun backwards people to think barkwardly (Its a new word I'm using) because that is how they have been taught to think. It fun for me to think analytically and deeply because that is how I have been taught to think. If those conditions change for those 'ignorant' people they undoubtedly they themselves would change. So it wouldn't at all be reasonable for 'young' to say that greedlessness will never ever ever ever happen, because the conditions for greedlessness have never been applied to a large-scale civilization. And of course the idea of greedlessness isn't practical if it was practical it would be implemented already. The future is always impractical but that's not to say its not realistic. The fundamentals of a greed-less society have been with humans for as long as their have been humans.

And last, someone commented something along the lines of 'if people were inherently good as this documentary claims then capitalism and other systems would be perfect.' I never heard such a claim and such a claim would be counter productive to the entire premise of the movie. We are (humans) open books. We hard wire ourselves through our lives but we are all also victims of our culture. We are bound to it in a sense in the same that one is bound to the language we speak, not to say we can't learn more languages with practice. Not to say we can re-wire our thought processes with practice. We can teach ourselves to be good decent human beings, hell that's exactly what we've been doing all along.

I find the Zeitgeist Movement incredibly intriguing. Most of the points that have been brought up against it seem to strengthen it simply because the system presented here is humble enough to change, better it self, when it needs too. That is to say that all these problems seem like problems that can easily be worked out and in so doing strengthen the
idea as a whole. Great discussion, truly mentally invigorating. Also what an amazing site! Thanks Vlatko you're doing a great job!

Hey... Just wanted to throw this out at the religious ones out there... Would appreciate an answer from Alex and/or Charles or anyone really...
Now I know this lady right... She is a very respected member of our community... Has spent ALL of her life building schools and hospitals for the poor... There is only one problem.... She is Hindu.... Does that mean that she goes to hell for not accepting Christ during the end of time...??? Even though she has spent all her time serving mankind... I know it must be difficult for all the Zeitgeist refuters out there to accept the fact that someone can actually do selfless work, but guys its actually true, people are selfless and amazingly productive if they want to be....

NO! It's best for maybe half billion people on the west! But what about rest of the world who's exlpoited and poor! Half of people on the planet live with 1 dollar per day! That's not right! Fu^k the capitalists! Punk's not Dead!

Pre-colonial africa (in general) was thriving with all kinds of civilizations, from small autonomous villages to massive states.

The continent has 90% of the world’s cobalt, 90% of its platinum, 50% of its gold, 98% of its chromium, 70% of its tantalite, 64% of its manganese and one-third of its uranium. The DRC has 70% of the world’s coltan, and most mobile phones in the world have coltan in them. The Democratic Republic of the Congo also has more than 30% of the world’s diamond reserves. Guinea is the world’s largest exporter of bauxite.

The capitalistic system works for those on the 'right' side of colonialism. Every day we are feeding our advertising-induced cravings with the resources (both natural and human) of the '3rd' world.

But then again, we might have different conceptions regarding the word 'work'..

I live in Serbia wich is not "western world" and I know how hard life is here! If you are in country like Georgia, Afghanistan or maybe Etiopia you wold hate America and western world! They are exploiting every country in the world, so when people of China and India and whole Asia and Africa whant riot there will be 4 billion people, and there will be change!

First I want to make clear I only read your latest post and Im only replying to it.

"If you look at society from the beginning of civilation you’ll realize NOW is the best time to live. The access to food, money and health care is much better then it ever has been."

From the perspective of a 'westerner' this may be true in a range of perspectives, but does it really apply to the truly exploited regions of the world? Where were the cradle of our civilization? It's not central/northern europe.. its not the US..

Regarding you comment on communism, are you insinuating that capitalism with it's 'free' market works?

What evidence do you have to support the claim of us being deep in sh^t in a hundred years. That sounds like fear mongering to me.

If you look at society from the beginning of civilation you'll realize NOW is the best time to live. The access to food, money and health care is much better then it ever has been. The amount of wars is WAY down, but the coverage of them is WAY up, so it seems like there's more of it happening. Your changes of dieing from war or being murdered or robbed is dropped to an almost non-existent level. New diseases seem to be popping up all the time and they are, but at a much lower rate then EVER. Again, the coverage is what makes you think it's happening more.

The world isn't perfect, its the best it's ever been. There will be no collapse of civilization. Their will of course be economic crashes, but as history shows us this doesn't drop one's quality of life to lower then it was a hundred years ago.

Systems like the one in the film are fantasy. They cannot and will not work because they are not based on actual human behavior but rather a exaggerated ideal of a perfect people.

Communism doesn't work for precisely this reason. Why do you think punishment was so harsh in Russia and China. Because you need extreme rules to enforce this extreme social system.

@young
We will be in deep sh^t 100 years from now, if we don't change our societies! If you watched Zeitgeist movie you will know about Venus project (a perfect society) wich can only work if greedy capiralists (those who's killing thousands people)stop ruling the world!!! We must find way to make all people equal, and we can't do it if we have money in our systems. Money is making classes, and when we have classes we aren't equal! And gues who control money? Handsome of capitalists (owners of big banks and corporations). They are making wars, assassinations, making poeple suffer because of more and more money! So we must fight that!

I did get it actually. If all people would change themselves and become less greedy it would work, but that will never happen. So it is not practical. Never ever ever ever happen. That's why communism doesn't work. Perfect in theory but flawed in practice.

@allan No you don't understand Zeitgeist say that people must change them selves. There is no human behavior, just the human greed! That is why we need a better society! And we can make it! AND I didn't said that we need communism, we need a idea of communism, which can only work if people become less greed!

Jack Fresco seems to know what he is talking about. I have shown this to some of my friends and they are just as blown away as I was by it.

communism/socialism is materialistic in nature. This is beautiful and alltogether different approach to developing society. complete freedom to self actualise as well as contributing in the best way you can.

To start off, I really enjoyed this presentation. I agree that this Star Trek-Utopian like society could work, given entire human population evolves to a state of non-greed, and learns to accept responsibility and self satisfaction from the amount of input and effort is put into the welfare and evolution of that society, not money. Our need for self preservation, including preservation of lifestyle/wealth is unfortunately at expense of others. Convincing people to let go of the Benjamins and Ferraris, and adjust to the point where this system would work may prove to be challenging and take a very long time. I know, if I was worth 53.5 billion dollars, i would have a hard time voluntarily jumping off cloud 9. I somewhat agree with Joanna on the idea of a singular social network - it does sound communist a bit, if you are talking about working for the greater good of the society. The reality is our current systems, especially monetary, are archaic and need a change.

Zeitgeist believes it is the system to blaim rather than the people. If the people were inherently as good as Zeitgeist assumes, then capitolism and socialism would both be perfect systems.

"a house built with the best of materials"

Where is are these resources going to come from for the 7 billion people in the world. Are they aware of how much polution and waste their would be in the pursuit of such industrious resources? In this case, the witholding of supply works to our benefit.

"The enviorment is creating the behaviour"

So the need for profit doesn't generate great contributions to humanity but it does generate higher crime rates? Counter intutive anyone? On one hand they say people will do as they please regardless of the system, on the other they say the system is the cause of the actions.

"Use of war for the benefit of it's corprate constituates"

Just because profits are generated in war does not mean this is the cause of the war. It's like saying the victum jumped into the car because he sued and got rich from it.

I can't even finish it. The first time I tried to watch this presentation I feel asleep at about 30 minutes in and woke up to them talking about a super computer controlling the world. THANK GOD that happened, because it seems like a major brainwashing scam is taking place here. If I had of not fallen asleep, then I might have been sucked into it.

Hi posters; IMHO, like so many you have been misled by mainstream Darwinism. Luckily, that is currently being buried. Try Perry Marshall & Howard Bloom websites to see how inadequate 19c materialism is.

The old ideas tended to contrast a relatively unchanging human individual with our modern ‘artificial’ societies. Actually, we have surprisingly little evidence for a fundamental human nature. Homo sapiens sapiens has always been a social creature, shaped by his/her interactions with whatever group/tribe they were born into.

If humanity is evolving today, it is very slightly, compared to the speed with which human cultures are evolving. Against Darwinian orthodoxy, our cultures, including our modern mega-cities, are the important evolutionary vehicles. Sadly, the human individual is increasingly demoted to the status of a powerless bio-component.

We must take revolutionary control of the social machine before silicon-based intelligence replaces carbon-based life. Either that, or the machine annuls itself, & us with it. BP

No thank YOU! For giving us all this site. It's really become my Mecca of entertainment and knowledge.

As far as wondering whats going to happen 300 years from now goes. I can tell you this; Technology will be far more advanced than anything we can ponder. Society will be completly different then what it is now but the people who live in that society will actully not be that different.

Many might be suprised to find out that as far as evolution is concerned, we are no more advanced as a speicies then the human who planted the first seed of agriculture was. If we could go back in time and take a baby from 10,000 years ago and raise it in todays society, it would be just as capable at intelligent thought. It would have just as good of a chance of becoming an astronaut as you or me.

Very insightful observation Charlie. I think I agree with you hear. While it is olny normal to strive for social perfection, to "design out the flaws" goes against the very nature of who we are. Let's say hypothetically we lived in a Zeitgeist Universe and then something catospraphic came and brought the world's population down to a few thousand. That few thousand wouldn't have the know how to survive and repopulate the race. In fact, all they would know from this social system would actually be counter productive towards such a goal.

I am intrigued by the comment "Design out the flaws," with regard to human nature. Who determines what is a flaw and what isn't? I am an animal that is considered human. My behavior, while a construct of my nurture, is also a construct of my evolution. The entire premise of this concept relies on the idea that there is something fundamentally wrong with my animal nature, and while that may be true in the context presented here, who can say that what technology and knowlege derives or supposes may be a better design for who I am as animal-as-human, is somehow better than what evolution has intended for me? In other words, how can we know that the paradigm presented here is somehow better than what has evolved over millions of years? This is not to say that the paradigm might be better, but rather asks the question, how can we know, with absolute certainty, that "design[ing] out the flaws" of human nature might be better than what nature herself has designed, despite how cruel and illogical nature might sometimes seem?

I like Gwenyth. The part about sexual selection and reproduction was a concern of mine, as well. I suppose everyone would be spending all of their free time at the gym improving themselves. It's still survival of the fittest, don't you forget it!

...and people are absolutely batsh*t insane. Myself included. The fact that (most) humans have ceased to throw feces at each other is nothing short of amazing.

Vlatko, thank you for this site as it has brought this elegant revelation to my attention.

congrats; you’ve obviously done a lot more thinking about this than the average punter. At many points I am in enthusiastic agreement. I think we have much in common, but: altho I have great respect for Karl Marx, his communist theory is flawed, or incomplete, as history has shown us. We’d be very unwise to go down that road again.

Granted, the Russian experiment was actually Red Tsarism, the Chinese one a lash-up of the ancient imperial model. That is basically becos neither system had a sufficiently developed industrial base to support a real democratic society. Democracy has a cost. It is a nonsense to vote on who will starve first. As Marx clearly saw, communism is not equally shared poverty & misery.

In both systems, political & social control fell into the hands of the usual bunch of ruthless authoritarians. But even given ideal conditions, Marx gave no clear idea of how we the majority can keep democratic control of the state machine, even if capitalism is abolished. He refused to speculate about post-revolutionary forms of society, which was a bit of a cop-out, since all systems tend to solidify into pyramids of power, governors at the top, governed below.

We at present have no problem about material sufficiency. Only about 15% of people in the developed world is engaged in productive work. Automated factories & robotics do the real work. We can have a 3-day work week, & have 4 days free for self-government.

As for the democratic control mechanism, no problem either; Desktop Democracy can abolish the power gap between governors & governed. Linked communities can discuss, vote on, & apply self-governing policies. This would abolish much of the heavy, bureaucratic superstructure.

Remote representatives, sitting in some Congress or Parliament, taking bribes from big business, would be eliminated. With Desktop Democracy, mass, grassroots debate & voting would be an ongoing process, not a once-every-four-years event. It would be a democratic continuum, with every bar, workplace or restaurant a mini-Agora. The nearest PC terminal would be a voting maching.

Compulsory work could be replaced by a state or local wage. Volunteers would do whatever they wanted, or loved to do, or even nothing. Policing, medical services, highways, transport, education, whatever, would be run by amateurs & professionals who were drawn to some activity or other. Work would be indistiguishable from play.

Equality is a chimera. It is a relationship of identicals. Since humans are heterogenous, all we can do is attempt to preserve equality of opportunity. So we must not forget the necessary role of innovators, entrepreneurs & the market. Sellers of better apples, mousetraps, or software must not be hindered, just the local communities must assert control if they look likely to grow into corporate ogres.

Our communities would similarly be acutely attuned to power-hungry political psychopaths.

Such radical transformations of societies would take a revolution. IMHO, I don’t think we have much choice. It’s either revolution, or dissolution, by those forces science & capitalism have unleashed, but cannot control. It’s adapt or die time.

It does seem like a lot of people have some odd ideas about communism. Here's the thing about communism: we've never had one yet. What would communism look like? Well, actually, it looks a lot like the Zeitgeist movement. Actually, it looks -precisely- like the Zeitgeist movement. Although the computer-run society is a new spin.

'Communist' Russia and China weren't. Or rather, they weren't completely. Each society has 2 systems, that overlap and influence one another. Power structure and economic system. In 'Communist' Russia and China, the power structure is basically military dictatorship. The Economic system is strong Socialism. In the modern US, the power system is pseudo-democratic Oligarchy(rule of the elite/rich), and the economic system is restricted capitalism. In the Zeitgeist system, the power structure is some sort of scientific dictatorship, or dictatorship via AI, and the economic system is pure Communism.

And there's nothing wrong with that. Communism is the most egalitarian economic system ever devised. And Zeitgeist is renewing the discussion on it, in a modern framework. The basic dilemmas with Communism are: how to make it happen, how to enforce it, and how to decide(and who gets to decide) the fine details, like who gets what, who does what(because cybernetics aren't going to remove -all- need for human labor any time soon), and what sort of behavior is allowed.

One of the difficulties with this, as well as Marxist philosophies, is that the will to power -is- basically self-evident. And fairly well upheld by scientific thought. Children seek power, first over their own autonomy, and then soon over others. Democratic decision making involves shifting balances of power. Power struggles invest every facet of human existence.

Take for example, one simple concern: In this utopia, how does sexual selection work? It is hard to see the idea that having all basic needs taken care of will eliminate the circumstance of one person wanting sex(or romance, or even social attention) from/with another, and having those feelings unreciprocated. Sexual selection, and even group discussion, a matter of who's voice is valued, is deeply laced with power dynamics.

Entertainment. Some are artists, some are not. Those who succeed at entertaining(since progress is obsolete, or better done by a machine) are given prestige. Prestige, validation, esteem, attention. These are all manifestations of power. Such power, such attention, such esteem, these are all part of one phenomena. And it is a resource that will always have a scarcity, in any society with greater then 2 members.

So this system is imperfect. Which is wonderful. Such imperfections will give the later generations of philosophers things to tinker with. Not sure, personally, as a computer engineer and AI dabbler, how I feel about the AI run power structure, we can hash out ideas as we go along.

But the ideology of moving the world toward an egalitarian and rationally constructed allocation of resources? This I support wholeheartedly.

Again I am inclined to agree with you. While I believe generally now is the best time in history to live, I do not believe that it is as good as it gets. I will forever struggle to do better for myself and for others.

Allan,
you could well be correct about general wealth levels being higher today. But is that per capita or GDP? Any idea? I expect someone somewhere has done the comparisons over history. But on what basis?

I expect you know; there is clear & unambiguous correlation between the income gap separating richest & poorest in societies on one side, & the levels of a whole range of social ills, from crime to obesity. Pols ignore this evidence with remarkable stamina, as do the mass media.

Up to now, various radical 'isms' have concentrated on schemes for redistributing wealth. Fine, but IMHO, not the profound answer. An ugly word, but I'm for 'empowerment' of everyone (or the interested ones) so they are self-governing in whatever constituencies or communities they agree on.

A 3-day week gives people the time to be their own government & administration. More significantly, they raise themselves to shoulder the responsibilities that come with everybody's rights. Being in control of your own destiny frightens some, but is a source of great pride & satisfaction for most. But if you are jobless, penniless & powerless - - - - OGT

Let me strike the wealthier part, the past few generations have had it better, but in the sense of human history, today is much better for the average person. And I agree with you completly, the revolution is comming.

P.S excellent bit on physcopathy. I realized this a loong time ago, and agree 100%.

Let me start out by saying im very impressed with your wealth of knowledge. I cannot dispute that any of the things you have covered are happening today. But what I will say is that in today's world you are much safer, healthier, and wealthier then any previous generation before us. Is the world perfect? Not even close. Is it better for the average person than it was 200 years ago, absolutly.

Allan,
‘The fact is, today is the best time in history to live. The safest, healthiest, weathliest time in human history is right now.’

Not quite, Dr Pangloss! The are several converging threats to human survival. But the greatest threat is from compounding combinations. As such, it is foolhardy to tackle them individually w/out understanding root causes.

Overpopulation: a very long phase of population growth is coming up hard against finite earth resources.

Environment: rising populations & their activities are poisoning our environment. As rivers, seas & lands are degraded, exploitation of remaining resources will intensify, a vicious circle. Polluted seas may react against us, as with the ‘Red Maria’ poisoning of South American coasts.

Plagues: exponential population expansion, degraded environments & health, & accelerating travel patterns, have overtaken medical science's ability to counter the evolution of diseases. Our super-cities are crucibles for new diseases. The next pandemic may be the last.

Armaments: weaponry has long been developed to the level where it can easily wipe out human life. New technology makes weapons cheaper & more widely available. The entire banking system is dependent on, hooked on, armaments production. There are few countries not making & selling weapons. Yet, all condemn terrorism & wars! There are enuf nukes around the world to kill us all several times over.

Capital/debt growth: the efficient ratcheting of profit by the capitalist engine has amassed enormous amounts of capital, far more than can be feasibly invested anew. If this surplus capital is distributed as more debt/higher wages, the upsurge of demand for material goods would be a more furious attack on the environment. The only answer is to dissipate the capital/debt as greater leisure – the three-day week – against which there is enormous political & propaganda resistance.

Economic instability: without viable predators/rivals/controls, high capitalist society has evolved in bizarre directions, existing in an ‘ideal reality'. The ultimate values of our global money economy have no more foundation than 'confidence'. All is dangerously dependent on IT networks. Should war, solar flares, or earthquake, knock out a section of the system, the house of cards could blow away. If computer systems, records of money movements, etc., were wiped, this would trigger a collapse of the world's economy. Mass starvation & chaos would follow.

Psychopathy: our political systems nurture the rise to power of moral cripples, those mentally incapable of grasping the consequences to others of their cynical power-games. They are mere ciphers of the profit imperative. The psychopath is uniquely equipped to flourish, since s/he is usually of above-average intelligence & has great skill in manipulating & deceiving others – the born pol.

Lastly, Allan, you mentioned that IT has accelerated the news dissemination business, so tending to give distorted impressions of disasters, doom & gloom. In a limited sense, true, but the increased speed & range of information exchange is itself another profound destabilizer. Stronger, IT might be the destroyer of our human civilizations.

Advances in infotech have always been the hidden shapers of history. City-states were made by the advent of the clay tablet; our modern world, with mass democracy, was enabled by Gutenberg & his printing press. The thing with IT is, its hidden, insidious effects are eroding the foundations of our old world. Unnoticed by most, work as 9 to 5 employment is disappearing, as is money.

Since the old system distributed money as wages-for-work, we now have a crisis; mass unemployment & massive amounts of conceptual money constipating banks. And no, this is not an argument for some economic redistribution repair job. This is an argument for a revolution to change our civilization utterly. No liberal-reformist shagging around; we need political power redistribution.

Yes, the revolution might be violent, but revolutions come in one form or another whether we choose them or not. It’s called history. We adapt & survive, or go extinct. That’s the message humming on the IT wires.

"The world you see today, full of war, corruption, elitism, pollution, poverty, epidemic disease, human rights abuses, inequality and crime is the result of this paralysis."

While this quote is true, what we fail to recongize is that their isn't really more of that happening in todays world, but yet we are seeing more of it because we all have TV's, internet, newspaper etc. It is more of a product of humans gravitating towards extraordinary stories that don't represent the world we actully live in. This way we interpet information also leads us to believe more of this is happening. For example, breast cancer is on the increase, but the reason for this is because more people are living longer, and once you pass the age of 80 your chances of getting breast cancer are 1 in 2. So the rates are rising because our general life exspectancy is, and who is going to cite that as evidence of a lower quality of life for the general population.

Another example is the number of war causalities in the 20th Century, which some say is higher then the number of causalties of war in all the previous centuries of recorded history combined. While this may be true, the percentage of the population killed in war in the 20th century has actually decreased from previous centuries.

The fact is, today is the best time in history to live. The safest, healthiest, weathliest time in human history is right now.

Joanna is correct, IMHO. Let’s imagine we want to produce a ‘widget’ of superb quality & long life. The necessary knowledge & technology does not come from a vacuum. It comes from competitive manufacturing & marketing. I.e., many individuals think they have the perfect widget, but when they sell it to the consumers, the consumers actually find a competing widget superior.

The ‘best’ widget design is rarely ever finalised. It emerges from the ongoing ineraction between buyers & competing designers & sellers, which is endless. There is no other higher authority!

Second very important issue, usually overlooked. We are genetically programmed to seek new ‘things’. This probably imprinted itself on our psyches in our hunting & gathering days. How we love to seek out & gather new things. Women lust for new clothes, males buy ludicrously priced carbon-fiber golf clubs, etc., etc. Our paleolithic ancestors spent days boring holes in small colored stones & shells – to make inessential necklaces. They trekked hundreds of miles to trade or acquire polished stone axes of no practical use whatsoever.

Consumerism is not a modern abberation. It is part of what makes us human. Capitalism became & remains strong precisely becos it catered to that powerful impulse. The left & ecology movements are pathetically slow in realizing this. We are facing global meltdown, yet our ‘radical’ thinkers are immune to such new ideas.

But agreed, we do need a new, higher form of democracy, powered & controlled grassroots-up. That could have the means & incentives to limit baroque, wasteful production & consumption. Potentially, it could end the now obsolescent money, banking & work rackets we inherited from the industrial revolution Roll on!

I read a book called the forest people by colin turnbull. he also wrote a book called the mountian people. the forest people were peacecful. equality of the sexes, respected women and childrens rights, rape was unheard of, if someone needed help they had help from any other member of the community. the mountain people were the exact opposite - like us in most of the world, they were violent, cruel, women and children were dominated and disrespected, rape was common etc etc. The mountian people were living in a spares harse environment, where getting food was a struggle. A bit like tribes in the middle east trying to live in a desert.
the forest people had plenty of resources food, land etc. they were all more or less equal and theft was exremely rare.
these books show that the environment does haev a very large effect upon human behaiviour.
however iam wary of the venus project and agree with the poster who showed the possible link to scientology. the venus project and the zeitgeist mvmnt make grandiose claims similar in flavour to 'new age movements'. it sounds like some sort of religious cult to me. no ideology has all of the solutions or answers to human problems, but some like anarchism and feminism are flexible and fluid enough to allow constant evolution of ideas, that is, anarchism in its purest form and not the twisted form that some so-called anarchists have become.

pff all of you please go on youtube to the zeitgeist official channel watch all the movies and interviews with peter joseph or jacque fresco... it does really cover about 90% of your comments(questions) pls go and watch it

Your comment is false and gay.
Communism and utopia ... Where did u got those conclusion ? If somebody tells you that everyone will have a house, food, energy etc does not mean that is communism. First of all communism is based on monetary economy like socialism, democracy etc. Zeitgeist promotes resources based economy where there will be no money, no need to work to sustaine your life and that goes for all the people and that`s where the real freedom comes ... you can study, travel anything you want...

Joanna C ...you didn`t understand what this movie is about... so please watch zeitgeist addedum and you will understand more.

One problem, simply naming your new world order creates divides and biases, stratification even if on the most microscopic level. If someone named it, (Venus Project), then someone prefered one name over the other. What about the one person who hated the name. Is the world fair for him. No. Human nature forbids earth to be an entirely equal and fair place.

Changing our resource management can definately benefit more people rather than a select few. However, at some point, people will again consolidate power and try to gain leverage. This documentary mysteriously lacks a counter to when aspects of their proposed plan begin to fail.

Evolution has a tendency to show us one meaning of our lives: To ensure the continuation and progress of our OWN genes into the future. Thats why things adapt, mutate, change, or do what they do. Is to make sure the next generation is properly equiped to survive the world they will live in. That makes everything about humans selfish. It is inherited, genetically hardwired to serve only our own subjective interests. This is what science tells us.

The world without all the horrors of the horrible aspects of human life, will simply create new ones to balance itself. A utopia cannot exist if humans are part of it. It is against what humans are. We need hardship, pain, suffering to survive. If we never had hardship, how would we know if our survival were being threatened. For something to exist, it must have an opposite, a foil. Subtracting basic human emotions will have an affect on human nature that cannot be predicted. Socialism and Communism are (as my old prof used to say) "great on paper". Implement a strict version and it will fall apart due to basic human nature.

The fact is, Venus Project, Capitalism, Communism, Socialism, Democracy all fail in its true sense because their are unbreakable rules thus constructing constraint. When humans are constrained or contained it is against their nature. To exercise true freedom is to do what is needed to sustain the survival of you or your interests. If something is organized it will divide, stratify, marginalize and segregate.

The only way for things to change is when a system becomes strained to the point of fracture. The world is messed up, and its showing signs that a great revolution may be on the horizon. I do not want to live in the Venus Project in the future.

What happens when I start to express all of my artistic inspiration when I pee on a traffic robot? I will have so much energy from not having a job, or any worries at all.

Wow lots of commentary and interesting how the topics trickled into religion, personal beliefs, and political perspectives. Love it!! I have to add my 2 cents as well, I have a lot to say but will try to not write a lengthy discourse.
Sam Saxton: October 2nd, 2009 at 19:44
utopia isn’t a place, it’s a direction
and also
Lykdysplt
January 3rd, 2010 at 22:09
blah blah blah…..call me when the revolution begins.

Love your comments: short, concise, and say much.

While I can see where the resource based economy proposed by Zietgiest movement is a fairer alternative to what we have now I can't see this happen immediately but it is an alternative direction to move toward in order TO MEET THE BASIC SURVIVAL NEEDS of all humans and other living beings on this planet.
Of course this system won't meet every need or fill every human desire or address every challenge but I can see how it would remove some of the stresses of our everyday lives that prevent us from expressing our true natures and could allow people to make more reasoned decisions about themselves and society. Now, it seems people (including myself) make decisions through knee jerk reactions based on our fears of not having our basic survival needs met. There seems this pressure to move fast and keep the status quo going because if not then we face starvation, alientation, and ultimately destruction. An illusion for sure but it seems to keep sheeple in the pens. I can add my personal perspective on this through my own financial meltdown with its emotional fallout. Since re-orienting myself to my changed circumstances I actually find that living simpler has increased my creativity, I feel more connected to and supported by the world and spiritual forces. I have a greater desire/energy to help others. I did have intentions before but being focussed solely on living in the rat race: money, survival, and possessions kept them at a distance. Of course I still have to work but putting my basic needs into perspective has opened up a much happier world for me and consequently this filters over to those I interact with. I realize more fully the necessity for our societies to make changes for the good of all.
Given we have been following this monetary, top down authority model for 1000's of years it is unlikely to change overnight but a different more caring society is a goal to strive for. If no one followed their dreams we'd still be in the trees (or whatever our lowest state was/is). Perhaps it can't be done immediately on a grand scale but each person who likes the idea of a resource based sustainable system can start with their own version in their own way---work to get off grid, change how you spend, reduce or eliminate your debt, support local agriculture, get involved with other groups, demand better from politicians, care about your neighbor and on and on. Working toward a fairer world will evolve if we all put in effort with a holistic philosophy propelling our actions. Onemore said it with the notion that WE ALL HAVE TO WANT IT AND WORK TOGETHER TO MAKE GRAND CHANGES OCCUR.There is a Zen (?) story about a village who needed a bridge over a river. Everytime any villager walked by the place choosen by them they would toss in a rock. Eventually they got a bridge.
We will also have to accept that we will have to change our mindsets in order to achieve this goal. Looking at the world proposed in this doc with our current mindsets won't work, we will have to evolve with the evolution of the new system.
Our current political system is a rotting, stagnant mess and needs to change. We put up with lies, corruption, personal agendas, and disregard for people. On a personal level we try not to act like this, we try to teach our children better ways but yet why do we seem to apathetically accept this on a societal/governance level? The Bible sums up our current system, The love of money is the ROOT of all evil...1Timothy 6:10
I don't think Zeitgiest has all of the answers or even the ulitmate answer but at least this is a proposal to start toward something better. As this idea to create a sustainable system evolves (luckily slowly) issues can be worked out on the way.
The whole of life involves a process either of growth or decay. The decay of this system has to evolve into the growth of something else, we can choose to aim for a greater system that espouses the philosophies of the centuries: to love one another as we love ourselves and to love something greater than ourselves.

The blah blah blah has to stop, each person has to take responsibility and start to act. The only one to make change is you and you and you...

May we all travel the same direction co-operating with each other's diversity.
A few sources that have influenced some of my thoughts on this:
*The Gary Cooper movie- Meet John Doe- is a fabulous example of taking care of those within your reach.
*The country of Bhutan rates it's GNP by GHP: Gross Happiness Product. The physical/psychological/spiritual health of the people comes before any other concern. They aren't rich in monetary standards but are more content. There is a Vid on YouTube.
*A Brave New World by Aldous Huxley and Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein are insightful SF examples of problems in Utopia.

PS Vlatko: when I first saw the ads I was a little dismayed but then I did think you need to eat too! They aren't intrusive and the site still looks uncluttered. Thanks again for the wonderful opportunities you provide for thought and discussion.

Wow! Lots of interesting and polarizing conversation on this one! But I would say that on this issue the answer lies in appropriate application and implementation of many of the theories presented here. Although I cannot agree with the "movement" entirerly, I can say that the elimination of a money-based economy is imperative. While it is certainly not the total solution of all problems in this world, it's elimination would be a huge benefit to the global society--much like the move from Fueldalism to Capitalism, while (as we know) Capitalism is not perfect, it is much better than Fuedalism and allowed for societal progress much like this will do.

The implemetation would have to be a gradual societal consciousness that this is what we want. When enough people want it, it will fall into place.

Many other aspects of society may have to evolve before this happens. These may include more prevelance of homeschooling(particularly utilizing "unschooling" principles), an evolution from "omnivores" to vegetarians(note Einstien and Edison) to vegan to raw vegan to fruitarian(the most ecologically, compassionatley, and healthfully responsible diet--if you have any specific questions about fruitarianism[where to get certain nutrients, etc] please ask here or email me at secrets0stolen[at]gmail[dot]com), as well as realizing that health is a birthright that cannot be found in drugs but in the human mechanism itself--therefore eliminating many problem as health care would be only necessary for congenital defects and emergencies of which enough charitable contributions can be raised to pay for, expansion of charity in general, etc., etc. It will be a slow evolution. It has been proven through the experiment of communism that violent rash overthrows based on paradigms that don't address all the issues(in many cases by not providing freedom for those issues to address themselves) do not work. There will be a social revolution, and the existence of this project is evidence of just that, but I do not believe this project in it's current form can or should ((to ensure social betterment)be that revolution. It is too rash and too limited. Much current knowledge is not even being considered.

As to someone's comment about this type of system being an impossiblity until someone invented a cure for death(a.k.a. aging--which is what I really think you meant as accindental death is not imminent) I beg you to investigate the works of Dr. Abrey de Grey. His projection is that anyone 40 or younger at this point should live for thousands of years. This is not some wishy-washy psuedo-science. He's a world-renowned geneticist on the verge of a breakthrough. Please check that out. I really believe that there is hope for society when we look at all the breakthroughs that are happening. The only immediate imperitive is an ecological one. If everyone went vegan immediatley and boycotted grains. That would give us enough time to put alternative energy systems into place. What we really need to focus on right now is CEASING the damage we our doing to the organism that sustains our existence. Then everything else--including repair of said organism and social revolutions can be addressed.

is mans thoughts/actions shaped by external factors[his environment]or internal[thought system]?Can there be something else before thoughts?How comes people who have gone through similar circumstances may endup behaving differently like opposite poles.

First, I am a socialist. Whatever views you have on that are your views. I did not join any organized socialist/communist political party simply because they treat the writings of Marx/Engels as a bible. To be followed literally as if they were perfect beings. Which is an extremely narrow minded approach to any sort of change. What they had then is different than now. Democracy in SOME form, as small as it can be would be needed from what I see. As humans, we need to build from ideas, and combine, tweak, adjust etc. Not one system is perfect, because as humans we have to adapt, and we are being constrained by systems that are obviously outdated and downright harmful.

There is this article from Oscar Wilde which is just genius I think, The Soul of Man Under Socialism if I remember correctly. Look it up, kinda sounds like what the Zeitgeist movement is about, taking technology to escape the enslavement of labor. People speak ill of socialism and I don't blame them, there aren't many if at all good examples of "socialism in practice." But not very many "democracies" are good either. It really has that horrible banner because thoughts of socialism and communism like the most obvious ones being the USSR and North Korea.

But what about the so called democracies in Africa, the US and South America? Not very good either, in fact some are quite horrible. I study philosophy and one of the things I love about the field is that simply, the more modern philosophers take what they deem as the good from the past, and denounce those they don't like etc. Sounds chaotic and narrow minded but genius flickers in this process as well. Generally, we need to look at some factors that produce growth and ingenuiety and equality, and eradicate the factors that made them dysfunctional and corrupt.

Socialist Democracy is one example of combining ideas. But I think we need to go further. The major problem I see on a person to person level is, pride and fear. Not wanting to admit you were wrong which I think you all can agree with. Being afraid of what might happen if things change. When I argue politics and life in general, some people just simply state, "well whatever I don't care you're just wrong." Even on stated facts. For example, I had this co-worker who is a radical Republican. I told him regarding 9/11, "well you know building 7 wasn't even hit by a plane, and that fire can't explain seeing as no steel building has ever been totally demolished by fire. He responded, "yeah whatever a plane hit it so its bullshit."

After I told him to look it up after work, he came back the next day and he just said, "I read the report and the report said fire." Reminds me of the tagline, "It must be difficult, for those who take authority as the truth, rather than the truth as authority." Pride was in the way, he can't admit he was wrong because he had too much pride. There is beauty in being wrong, when I'm wrong that means I learned something. If I were to tell someone, 2+2 equals 5 and someone said I was wrong that its 4, I learned something. And of course we have fear, fear of change.

Like the common, "well what if gets worse?" But what if things get better? The best change has come from the brave not the cowardly I say. The theories I had when I was 18 have change and I have adapted my thinking for the better change. Once again, why I haven't joined any socialist/communist party its outdated thinking, but I am a socialist because the overall nature of socialism applies to humanity, we survive as a collective not as a me first species. Yeah, this movement has some tinges of socialism, but thats good. In my opinion, if I can be proven wrong wonderful! Throw some input on it and we can carry that to another great idea, something maybe similiar, or very different. Whatever it takes to take humanity to the next level =)

funny how people that cant think for themselves need some ridiculously fabricated piece of fiction crammed down their throats just to get them to think.
basically, think for yourself BECAUSE WE SAID SO!
what a sad future we have in store if this is how revolutionaries think these days.

Sorry, but evolution has been proved for 150 years +/-, yea so its not solid at all. While reading these posts, there have been awesome arguments on either case. My thinking, though simple, you don't want what Peter Joesph wants, that is great. It in no way makes it right. You believe, exactly believe what you like, but 100, 1000, 1 million years from now it won't matter. However, what Peter Joseph and other have impressed on me, is simply giving a s*** about anything. Do what you can, in a simple idea that maybe, maybe when we are dead and gone, our kids and kids kids have a better life. I expect many to not agree with this, but dam, I am done with moving backwards.

Lets be realistic, this is not going to happen in the real world. Reminds me of the jetsons, a utopia that cannot exist. Utopias have never and I doubt will ever exist. Now that have got that out of my chest, I have a question to ask and I need someone to answer me!

Why is no one asking a really obvious question about the explosion of sooo many different conspiracy theories to the world and general population. Its everywhere literally its not hard to get ur hands on something like this movie or like the other zeitgeist or any alex jones movie on the net today! Surely if what they are saying is true, then why oh why would the so called 'ruling elite' let them expose them???? it makes zero sense whatsoever! The only logical conclusion i can arrive at is, there is no ruling elite or worse of all, its not about exposing the ruling elite but rather, exposing us! Now i want to hear opinions!

Georgie,
I agree, communism is still a monetary system. I understand the distinction. I'm calling the Resource-Based Economy a new spin on communism because the eventual implementation of an RBE would almost certainly include a transitional period strongly resembling communist dictatorships of the past. Not everyone is going to just switch instantly to a non-monetary system, particularly those already in power or depend on a monetary system to make their living. What we'd likely see at first is a system that very much pretends to be egalitarian but is still driven by monetary (or even resource-based) profit, rather than the common welfare.

Personally I'd love to see the money system disappear. I can't stand that silly green paper. I'm just thinking realistically here.

ParadOXical Snapshots on society. It's not hard to see the teetering facade that is displayed for the public to imagine on. I believe in Ghosts in the Machine, I do have Hope, yet there will need to be a Explosion, of sorts, to release the power. I am well aware of what this looks like.. Close your eyes if ya don't wanna see it. It's just gettin bigger now. wink

Tyler my friend. you don't understand. Communism is still a monetary system. The Zeitgeist movement is clearly looking to explore other avenues. What it looks like noone knows yet, but for sure it will not look like communism. The idea is to get beyond the master servant thing, the money thing all together. I'm not sure I agree, but I take my hat off to them for trying and having the balls to explore other avenues of thought. Please understand no on knows what a moneyless system looks like, it has yet to be named, but for sure communism it is not. All monetary systems lead to slavery - yes even capitalism.

New spin on communism? Absolutely. But does anyone actually have a more humanitarian and practical solution to global disparities than this? I doubt it. The fact is that while socialism is a scary thought to many people (for obvious reasons), many of its basic tenets WOULD be beneficial to society as a whole IF society as a whole is willing to implement them with faith and integrity and not allow personal greed to overpower the common good. It only works if EVERYONE is in on it. You can't force change down people's throats, they have to want it and they have to work together in COLLECTIVE self-interest in order to achieve it for themselves.

This existence, and all therein, is nothing more than the singularity(if you want to call it God,fine,though i am hesitant to use such a loaded word that means many different things to many different people) subdivided infinitesimaly in order to experience itself and all possibilities. We are each one, tiny part of this whole yet we are all ultimately of the same substance and essence. We are condensed light and energy. There is no physicality, it is illusion, a product of electromagnetic resistances and interaction on scales too small for our enfeebled decoding apparatus to percieve.
It is all just experience, good bad or indifferent. I wish the zeitgeist people well, it may well be a new and productive experience. But that is all. Our continual, unfulfilled, fevered "progress" towards a percieved future paradise may be nothing more than the relevant experience for this planet. Our constant search for "truth" can never be realised for one man's truth is another man's lie. All is a matter of perception and no two men's perceptions can be exactly the same as they can never see the world from exactly the same place or filtered through the exact same experiences. I cannot be you, you cannot be me. No social system(from the roman word for sewer,incidentally, i'm sure you can grasp the modern implications for this re Educational, Judical, Medical etc.) can ever satisfy everybody.
We have been here already, we will be here again.

P.S. I intend no offense with these comments, they are little more than opinion. If offense is caused, i apologise.

yes Razor, I came across this at university albeit very breifly, there is science behind the sonic values of sound espcialy in tone and melody that alters the mood of individuals and with or sometimes without the influence of society. for example an upbeat tempo and melody can give a sense of excitement where as a sombre and down beat tempo and can give a sense of sadness, forlorness, lethagy or even result in procrastination. the pschological properties of sound and music should not be sniffed at or ever be left behind in society, especialy when you are trying to change the ways of society as the resource based economy seems to want to do. p.s i shal check out docu, im sure i shal find it prettty interesting and hopefully informal, thanx for the recomendation

Nice idea this (so was comunism and that just doesnt work after a monetary sytem) any system folllowing the want and greed of capitalism cant be erased and replaced just overnight, this will take in my opinion 100 years+ and how would you get every country in the world to fall in line? Anyway i dont want to live in a society that doesnt adress entertainment especialy MUSIC as main point to society. Without entertainment people will become bored and unsatisfied. Take a look at kids and boredom they certainly dont mix lol

Razor
You write:
"The information about Parallel Universes, Multidimensional Existences, etc: that is in Jane Roberts books are being proven by Science now. How does that grab you?."
-----It doesn't. See I know the spirits know way more than people. This means nothing. The problem is they make people loose sight of the reality of Christ, and this for an eternal purpose...(hell). Also note, that there where spirits possesing people in apostle Paul's time that spoke of Jesus as being The Son of The Most High God, so what? They know the truth. The thing is, who are they really serving? They give alot of knowledge, in the hope people will believe their message in whole. I have warned you of this reality, believe what you want.

Also, I have no problem with the name Seth (Adam's son's name was Seth!), but I do have a problem if an invisible spirit that possesses a person is called Seth! I explained why twice. If you can't see a possible connection, well, you need... a healing! :D
So, if I'm not asking for much, as I elsewhere have said, try to read carefully and understand first what I write, and then comment on it.

Typical Alex!. You are a hoot! (no offense) that is why I like to see you on these posts. :D

I have gotten used to you. Probably others have to.
Seth is a name that is all, I imagine a lot of people are called Seth.

I have an antique clock made by Seth Thomas, should I be watching it with reservations. It might start walking around or something!.

And yes I am amazing, not stuck in a mold. Not scared to think of alternates.

The information about Parallel Universes, Multidimensional Existences, etc: that is in Jane Roberts books are being proven by Science now. How does that grab you?. Or are you going to refute the scientists also!

And I will stick to "Achems" Razor, I can choose any name that I want!

Sam Saxton hi!
If you’re interested, see my comment above at August 16th, 2009 at 23:56 but especially on Zeitgeist Addendum at June 20th, 2009 at 04:47. (Put them in "Edit/find" and you'll go right to it.)

Razor hi!
I insist on what I wrote on:
September 15th, 2009 at 23:53
And remind you: “In Egyptian Mythology the entity Seth is considered the god of confusion (Satan bears the same description), the demon of death, god of chaos, the embodiment of hostility and even of outright evil, and more.”
You write:
1) “I read everything that Jane Roberts published for years, and to me it makes sense.
-------This is because you don’t have a clue of the truth (no offense), and being deceived comes naturally. :D I mean you believe what a demon called Seth says, reincarnation, mushroms created religions, then you also say: “My God is called “All There Is”!!” Goodness gracious, what else is next?? It all “makes sense” to me too…
I believe your God is “All there is” but truth :D (Joking razor. I just grabbed the opportunity :D )

2) “Everything that Seth says basically goes contrary to Religion. It leans more towards Science.”
-------And you think this is a coincidence? That the spirit in her, is not manipulating the truth?.. You are so ready to believe anything but the truth, you ARE SO AMAZING! I wish I had you in a lab.

3) “Before you try to demolish the Seth material, you should follow your own advice and read it!
-------Read what razor? That as the demon says: God is not a person (imagine that… a spirit is saying this! That is really a twist.). Hell doesn’t exist. Christ was not crucified. Etc. You got to be kidding me! I don’t want to get my hands dirty :D and I don’t like to be bored with lies, especially huge ones that deceive people! If I want science, I’ll get a science book, not Jane Robert’s books! Mercy! Mercy!

God bless!
PS. By the way, it’s not “Achem’s razor”, but Ockham's razor or Occam's razor. At least get your name right :D :D :D But I believe just “Razor” suits you fine, think about it (“private” joke) :D :D

Hey, hope I'm not disrupting the religion discussion, but I wrote an e-mail to PJ and JF and was interested to hear what you guys think of it. Here it is:

The biggest obstacle that keeps the Zeitgeist Movement from being widely accepted is the legitimate fear of creating another centralized elite power. The only way people will accept the resource based economy is if there is no central leadership in the transitional phase, but rather a true democracy (guided by the scientific method). People will never give up what little power they have left to the leaders of the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist movement, but luckily, they don't have to. Instead we can invite them to be the leaders. In the same way that Wikipedia is a participatory information resource (and very successful in contrast to Encarta, the heavily funded, non-participatory, original online encyclopedia, now discontinued), the most important technological contribution that the Zeitgeist Movement can make is to create an efficient method for organizing humans democratically, a participatory method of debating any and every point of view. It will neutralize any opposition by allowing a means to voice such opposition without the luxury of a limited point of view. This will phase out the outdated technology of 'representative democracy' when people have access to all facts and come to agreements on issues instead of being fed by the media and joining a party. Indirectly, this forum will become the new government, as support for it's consensuses will far outweigh the support for the agendas of conventional government. As fewer join military and police structures, this will eventually lead towards governments' inability to function and enforce what the people are against.
Unless this becomes the primary focus of the Venus Project/Zeitgeist Movement, people will continue to get away with labeling the resource based economy as communist, socialist, fascist, NWO, globalist or some other kind of oppressive system and they may end up being right, for it is the only way to secure the safety of the message from the elite minority.
In closing, I would like to say that the Zeitgeist Movement: Orientation Presentation is potentially the most important message of truth in the history of the human race. I am making these suggestions in hopes that the whole planet can benefit from it's wisdom. Thank you.

I guess everybody must of heard about the "Seth Books" by Jane Roberts.
If not, I will add it here.

Every thing coming into vogue now day's, like Alternate Realities, Multidimensional Selves, the Nature of Reality, the whole concept of God. The latest Documentaries, like "The Primacy Of Consciousness".
I knew about in the 1970's, thanks to an entity called Seth, in a book called "Seth Speaks".

About the God concept. The entity Seth, who claimed to be a minor Pope, stated that Jesus never died on the cross, but that another was chosen and drugged to go in his place. This is the reason why he told people after he "Rose From The Dead" not to touch him.

The Stigmata that Jesus had was a gift of the spirit; The same gift which has been documented to have been given to various Catholic figures in history, like Francis of Assisi, and more recently, Padre Pio.

I had a similar experience :-D! What the heck does the question actually ask? Oh, my, I have so & so seconds to answer it! Not native English speaker..... Did I understand the question right? Results..... hmmmm, am I really retarded??? :-D

Years ago, I've read a book called Emotional Intelligence, by a guy called Goleman (don't recall his first name). Excellent book, There's more to intelligence than just your level of concentration at a given moment, or whether your left or right side of brain work better.

Live long and prosper :-D (sorry, I use the same greeting sometime, are you a fan?)

I was only sarcastic, as I said, there was nothing more to it. But you are sooooo right about disadvantage of this way of communication as one can't see the other person's body language! I can fully agree to that! Now I hear you're teaching in Korea. Wow! I wish you good luck there! And that's without sarcasm. I also understand now why you felt like you had to point out your IQ, though I tell you that's wrong - as a human being you are entitled to your own opinion, with IQ 160 or 70 :-). If you believe that Jesus is the son of God, in a heated debate I could tell you that that was stupid, but I would not deprive you of your right to believe so. Equally, you could tell me that what I believe in is stupid, but the same applies there. But IQ has really nothing to do with it in my eyes. I just don't like pretentious people :-). With that settled (I hope), we can move on. Cheers!

Thank you. You too. I'm up late here in Korea (can't sleep sometimes) and I have to teach tomorrow, but I have a long 3 hour break between classes, and oh yes! I shall use the big chair in the teacher's lounge and I plan to hold it down with my whole body for at least 2 of the 3 hours! :-) I plan to show my students the documentary about the blind boy who used echolocation to get around. Truly amazing! I'm sorry that his gone now. What a loss for the world.

Alex: Please pardon any spelling or typos. I'm rally not that good without a spellchecker. Average, perhaps.

Anyway, I don't mind posting, I just feel sorry a bit for Vlatko's website getting all "posted" up with slightly irrelivent stuff. (Sorry, Vlatko!!!)

Anyway, Alax, I'm like 97% Arminian (sp?) in my thinking and I honestly don't have a Calvinist mindset (in my opinion). That gets into the whole predestination/free will thing. I meant that whatever "sinful" (for lack of a better word) nature I have and from whatever sin God has delivered me from is an on-going process. My understanding of God's salvation is simple but profound: If your heart's desire is to love and serve and obey God, then He will lead and guide you and you are saved (by faith in Jesus' propitiation for our sins or substitutionary death on the cross). But, you can walk away from it if you like, as Mr. Razer has done (presumably).

You all seem to have some religious backgrounds, so for time's sake, I'm using my "church words" but I really don't like to use the loaded words like "sin" "predestination" "propitiation" etc. Anyway, trust me, I'm not Calvanistic, sorry for the confustion. I understand what you were saying and agree with it. Thanks!

Achems Razor: I agree with you totally about time. We are not created to understand or even deal with "time" because we are immortal, as you hypothosised. We are "timeless" and our souls fight againt time, and aging, and dying, and the mere concept of linear time is "foreign" to us, because we are not meant to be tied to time. In fact, as I understand it, "time" eventually shall be no more in God's plan for the universe, and eventually, we shall spend eternity either with Him or without Him (in Heaven or Hell).

Which "true God" am I talking about? The true One of course! We could play word games, and I KNOW there are a lot of denominations and many claim to be the ONLY way. Blah blah blah. I think even Islam is monotheistic if you consider Allah to be God. So, how do we know the one true God? It's acutally quite simple: God knows you. God does care and He does know Achems Razor, and Charles, and Alex, and He said "You will find me when you search for me with your whole heart." Alex, I'm sure you can find that for me in the Bible! :-) Do the tongue-speaking "Holy Rollers" know God? yes, some of them, but I've known a few that made me want to vomit in their presence who I knew were snakes in the grass (and pastors). That is why the Bible says that those whom we thought were "sheep" turn out to be goats, and those we least expected to be "sheep" but everyone thought were "goats" are actually the beloved chosen ones of God. Of course you understand I'm using Biblical metaphores. Goats (the rejected by God) and sheep (the accepted by God). Who is who? I don't worry about it, but I encourage everyone I can, both "sheep" and "goat" to love God, serve God, trust God, and allong the way, God takes over and it turns out ok. I do have an idea of who is who as the Bible does say "By thier fruit you shall know them) but ultimately the distiction is not mine to bestowe. God knows, and no one will get a raw deal from Him on Judgment day; the righteous in His eyes (those that have accepted Jesus as the Chrsit and savior and lived a holy and sanctified life)--again my opinion, will inherit eteranl life, and those that have done evil in His sight will not. The Lake of Fire is thier reward.

Anyway, I forgot to ask, "who's Achem? and why does he need a razor?" Anyway, Mr. Razor, I would encourage you not to look so much at others, but look for God with your whole heart and soul and mind, and surely you will find Him. Let God worry about who is who; the real and the counterfeit and the self-deceived. I hold out the most hope for those most like you (passionate) as once that passion is turned in the right direction (again my opinion), then away they go! Example: the Apostle Paul. Apathetic souls are those I hate the most as nothing hardly at all can move them and they spiritually "sloth" themselves strait into Hell.

WTC7: The I.Q thing is very subjective, I know. It's written by people and given to people of the same culture, etc. and mindset, otherwise the results are skewed. I took one I.Q. test and it was pretty hard for me as the crappy thing had shapes and patterns with COLORS and I'm very colorblind, so I was a bit upset as I had to very systematically look at each shade taking the test while also looking for "patters" so at the end of the test I was scored at 136 and I was happily surprised with that. I said that just because I'm sooooooooooo tired of people viewing people of faith as mindless or intellectually insignificant people without advanced education or a basis for thier faiths. That's all. Perhaps if I were 100% humble, it wouldn't bother me for Christians to be thought ignorant people, but I'm not quite there yet. The problem with the internet is that you can't judge a person's motive for saying something without the body language, etc. I knew you were sarcastic. I just was wondering why so much rancer with it (assumed). I know my faith is a minority opinion, but that doesn't mean I'm not right! Ha! :-)

Anyway, sorry again Vlatko for taking up so much server space! Great website, lots of fun actually! But I need to not take too much time away from my little ones, nor my lesson plans, etc. so I might or might not post again, but I'll check back in a day or two to catch up with any reply you might have.

Alex actually explained to you very nicely already, but he was too nice.

Yes, I was sarcastic about your IQ. And since 136 is obviously not enough for you to understand why I was sarcastic then there isn't much point in explaining it, is there? But I'll give you a hint - it has nothing to do with people, even geniuses, being religious or not.

Depending on the test and the scale used, the minimum for Mensa differs, but on the basis of one of those scales you could get in.

Charles hi!
1) To begin with, thank you for your kind words. I very much agreed on your point that man should in humility open up to God's truth, giving it -in objectiveness- ground to grow.
2) I have to be honest though about that part about your IQ; it did not put you in a good light. You putting that forth, could of been done with a child's heart manner, yes, but how can one know, right? I believe that if you think about it, you will realize this was a mistake. We all make mistakes and go on.
3) Since you said this is your last comment here (I don't see why, but it's your choice), I must address something you said, so no false impressions are left behind. It seem that the fruit of Calvinism is behind it, and Calvinism in light of Scripture is a dangerous false teaching, a heresy that allows the destruction of one's relationship of God. I wish I didn't have to say the following here, but I didn't know if I'd hear from you again, even if you would read this message.
Anyway, to the point: You spoke of Jesus delivering you from sin, but then you talked about "on-going daily" sin. My purpose is not to judge you but only edification in Christ. Now, tThis continuous sin equals trampelling over your covenant with God, and, in that covenant, is salvation. Yes, the sin issue is dealt with by Christ, this is your gift from God, but you cannot -with your life- spit in The Face of The Giver. His message is clear (my words in parenthesis):
Act 20:20-21 how I shrank not from declaring unto you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly, and from house to house, 21 testifying both to Jews and to Greeks repentance toward God (The Giver), and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ (The Gift).
Repentance is a way of life for a Christian, because sin is always hated by God, The God that as you know won't be played with.
"Heb 10:26 For **if we sin wilfully** after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, **there remaineth no more a sacrifice for sins**, 27 but **a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and a fierceness of fire which shall devour the adversaries**. 28 A man that hath set at nought Moses law dieth without compassion on the word of two or three witnesses: 29 of **how much sorer punishment, think ye, shall he be judged worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace**? 30 For we know him that said, **Vengeance** belongeth unto me, **I will** recompense. And again, The Lord shall judge **his people**.31 It is **a fearful thing** to fall into the hands of the living God."
And there are a great many passages like this in the N.T.
So Charles, in a few words, flee from sin, remove from your life (by any "cost") that which provokes sin in your life. Christianity is entered through a narrow gate and is walked on a pressure filled road, according to Jesus. All else is Calvinistic deception; the number 1 weapon of our enemy against the Church (believe it or not), one that is not realized hence its connection as well to our sin that is allowed or indirectly promoted by such sermons...! Believe me I'm just touching on it here.
Now, I sense, you "hate" sin, but 100% hate is expressed through attempts against it, conscious everyday attempts against it. Otherwise we are fooling our selves at our expense...! It's not repentance but regret. Two different thing, although unforunately some times taught as being the same. In Greek they aren't.
In Christ you can win against sin! If one says "I try to", the question is "how do you know you try?", how is it manifested practically? Do you avoid sinners, do you remove your computer or television if that's where the problem comes from, do you fast on it, do you confess it to others and ask them to pray, do you put your time in benefitting others with needs as The Lord asks, by the way avoiding sin?? These are just a few attempts, but again I persist, repentance is a way of life (decided) enriched with God's grace and blessings.
Charles, don't comment on the above; they are for you. Just think and pray and move in faith and repentance. I did my part.
(Heb 12:12-13, 2Pet 1:1-9, 10-15, Phi 2:12-13)
Again, my prayer is with you.

May God give you His increase!
P.S. We can talk in private, via forum or by getting my email address form there or here from Vlatko. If you register on the forum and send me a personal message I will reply.

How can I not, reply to your your last post!
Actually you are right! Maybe you are a little smarter than I thought.

There is no God! It is all spiritual, all an illusion!
"All There Is" means everything is all ready done. Our Universe, all alternate Universes, all Time, past, present, and future. But that means space and time are illusions?. Could be, so says Theoretical Physicist, Julian Barbour, in his book "End Of Time". We live in a static Universe, in which we may be immortal! Einstein, who had an I.Q. of 160 thought that God did not play dice with the Universe, than along came Quantum, which threw everything out of whack. The only way most eloquent paradigms make sense, is to eliminate time from the computations.

I am not angry Charles, just very curious, I have been the God route, where every second word was, "Praise The Lord". I have heard people talking in tongues, I have seen them rolling around in the aisles, in there mass induced Bliss!

I would like to know which "True God" you are talking about?

Out of the 19 major religions of the World, that are subdivided into 270 large religious groups, and many smaller ones,
34,000 separate Christian groups have been identified in the World.

The 1000 Christian faith groups in the U.S. and Canada, believe themselves to be the true Christians. And even out of those, if you are not "Born Again" You are out of luck! So Charles you better be "Born Again", Or you will be, "screwed, blued and tattooed"! and walked into the elevator that goes down, and down!

WTC7, I haven't checked, but I think with Mensa you have to have a 150 I.Q. or so to join, but I've met many genious level people that loved God and so I'm unsure why your post is so racid with sarcasum and venum. Scientists, doctors, and professors--brilliant men and women of God. Are you a memeber of Mensa?

Also, Mr. Razor, what kind of God is "all there is"? Yes, I read your posts carefully, and yes I read that phrase in your post, but if everything is God, including yourself, (I suppose), then nothing is God. That which is created cannot be a god in itself. No, Achems Razor, I'm probably not "smarter" than you in raw intelligence, but wiser, yes, by far, for only the fool has said there is no God, and you and I are not him and that bug on my wall is not either!

But like I said before, no one with any level of intellectual arguments will change your mind. Do you wonder why Jesus preformed no miracles for those that asked for them and why he did so few miracles in his own hometown? The reason is that He has nothing to prove to those who would not believe no matter what he said or did. Faith is a matter of the heart, and if you think youself wise in thinking that "all there is" is your God, then you've proven yourself a fool in God's eyes, and you will receive nothing from him but eventual judgement. But, I do like your passion!

But, I also know that the Bible says that no man (or woman) comes to God without God first drawing him. His voice is small and polite and kind (now) and if you don't want to listen, it will not even peirce your mind. I don't know what has happend to make you so angry, but even now as long as there is breath in your lungs and a heart that beats, it's not too late, and God will listen if you come to him with a humble and sincere heart as millions of us have already done.

Your other dimention stuff and the fact that you can move your hands and it is instantly felt in whatever cosmos whatever, whatever, and whatever you said, says that you are very smart intellectually. But, the other dimentions you talked about are spirutal ones; Heaven and Hell; deomons and angels. If I'm right and you're not, then I've gained everything and you've lost everything (eventually). If you're right and I'm wrong, then I've gained only a peaceful joyfull happy life and lost absolutely nothing. Blessed (happy)is the man who's God is the one true God.

Anyway, this will be my last post on this topic. I won't post any more, so you can have the last word if you'd like.

Good luck to all, especially you, Alex. I suspect we are birds of a feather! God bless you and may you all find peace of heart and peace of mind, and only you yourself can say whether or not that is so. Listen to your heart and not to your mind and you will know for sure. God is but a whisper away, and yes, I love Him with all my heart, soul and mind. He's delivered me from more sin than I can to remember (on-going daily), so why should I not be his greatful little "sunbeam"?

I am happy for you, that you have a high I.Q. 136-WOW!! Does that mean you are smarter than me?? You do sound like Gods little Sunbeam. Your God that is!. Read my post again, or does yous high I.Q. not allow you to have reading comprehension??. I do believe in God!. My God is called "All There Is"!!. And mine does not come out of a Man made Book, Books!

I appreciate Alex taking the time to refute some of "Mr. Razer's" comments, especially about the Bible. I have a 136 I.Q (pretty good, but not quite genious), but I understand why the Bible says that few of the "wise" or intelligent in the world's opinion is chosen to serve God, and few that are great in any way are selected by God for His service. Pride of "life" and pride in "science" and pride in "ourselves" is like a filthy stench in God's nostrils. But humbleness, gentleness, kindness, and meekness is so rare, and can only be cultivated by time in God's presence. We all have the seeds, but as Achems Razer so graphicly displays, even if God Himself logged on and added a comment on this website, Mr. Razor would not believe even the soundest of truth. He's made up his mind to disbelieve even God Himself.

This movement as a whole leaves a sickening feeling in my stomach. We are ultimately born to love "God" and when we deny that fact, we love other things--power, money, or darker things that that even! This movement will not work any better than Godless Communism works now. Ultimately, we do not choose what is right and wrong with our intellect or our minds, but with our hearts and with our spirits. We just "know" when we are deceiving ourselves even. That is why we come as "children" to God (as the Bible says), and not philosophers and "free thinkers". The Apostle Paul was most likely a genious intellect, but even he understood that we know and understand by "faith" and not by intellect. Even Mr. Razer has faith, it's just not in the one true God.

Vlatco, I love your websight. It's great! I wish there were more documentaries that view the Christians and thier faith in a favorable light. Hooray for the nature docs. I could spend a year on this website and love every minute of it! Thank you!

I just feel the need to comment on the what is the common view of communism. When we hear that word we always think of the USSR, but that has nothing to do with what Marx had envisioned. In fact it more closely resembled the stranglehold of the corporations have on the world today. As for the whole "human nature" argument, it would help us to remember that for millions of years we lived in small groups where we all contributed to the best of our ability to the welfare of the group, we took care of eachother and sharing was the norm. Just because greed and ambition are the norm in the West, it doesn't mean it's that way for all humans. There are plenty of cultures today that actively shun greed and work very well on a basis of sharing. One would assume the same concept is at work within your family- we just need to evolve to a point where we can extend that type of care and compasion to the rest of our extened family of the human race.

Razor,
You write:
"But all your refuting and rebuttals are Bible quotes"
----That's all they are huh? :) :) ;)
"...to put it bluntly, I am not interested. There is nothing you can prove to me."
----Fine, but there are others here who are interested. So when you trash The Bible, I will be here to expose you. You don't have to read my comments on them, but you're welcomed to :)

I agree with your views Polliegene, but try to relax about the googleAds. This is a documentary site, not a political site. The owner of this site have the right to get some revenue, and you don't have to click the ads. Anyway, your film comments were great :)

I just finished reading through the forum, "what about the religions."
On Vlatko's #7 reply, about the "gems" that are in the Bible, always points me in the direction of a vengeful, vindictive, fearsome God. That God to me is man made. Only Homo Sapiens could think that way. My God is called "All There Is" which encompasses every thing, and is divorced from what we think and do. To "All There Is" we are like the water vapor film condensing on a glass, One swipe and we are gone! The only thing we are relevant to, is Mother Earth, and to Ourselves.

On PJ's #10 reply, My and others, extrapolation is, we are on a specific vibrational level we call reality. As an analogy, AC current vibrates at 60 cycles per second. If we where able to slow down time, an electric light bulb would seem to go on and off. If we could further slow down time we ourselves would be flickering on and off. We are here and then we are not here! According to Quantum Mechanics there are 10 to the 500 power of alternate universes that are also flickering on and off, at different vibrational levels. But we are all as one! coinciding with one another. Living with one another so to speak. Our Gravity is the weakest force because it may only be a bleed through from our nearest other, greater vibrational Universe.
Quantum Mechanics has proven if a split molecule was set at say 15 billion light years away, any variation in one would register in the other instantly! To enhance what I am saying, just push out your arms to create air waves,they will be felt instantly in all far reaches of the Cosmos. That is Quantum, and it is weird!

To Alex, Even though I was baptized as an Anglican, I divorced myself from Church many years ago. I am not exactly unfamiliar with the Bible. I do respect you, you are very voiced on the Bible.
But all your refuting and rebuttals are Bible quotes, to put it bluntly, I am not interested. There is nothing you can prove to me. Regards. :D

Who said that I'm against the monetary system, Polliegene? Zeitgeist is, and I find the movement somehow intriguing and interesting, nothing more. After couple of hundreds of years maybe it will be reality but at this moment is truly impossible.
So as long as I'm living in the monetary system, I will depend on it.

There are 750 films on this site in 25 categories, so if I you find Zeitgeist here that doesn't mean that this site is supporting the movement in any way. After all there are films on Nazis, Hitler, various religious movements, and even a film about Scientology itself here but that doesn't mean that I'm supporting all of them.

As far as the Google Ads are mentioned you can:
1. Not click on them, as Falcon pointed out,
2. Use Ad blocker for your browser and you will not see any Ad on any site,
3. Watch the films in full screen.

And I'm not Scientology supporter, admirer or follower. Google randomly shows those ads.
And again as Falcon said I think I have the right for some revenue if you consider the fact that I've spent countless of hours of dedicated work on this site, just for your viewing pleasure.

Cheers

Polliegene
- 09/07/2009 at 03:49

Good for Joanna C to being analytical about the Venus Project and the Zeitgeist movement. Communism was spawned from Marxist ideals and the Marxist doctrine preaches that the Marxist utopia has no leader. Everyone would work together for the greater good by the use of technology, which back then was the production of agriculture by the means of labour. There were no machines or biotechnologies that were doing the job like today, so the way to the greater good was through equal labour. Marxism is against organized religion and Theocracies. Capitalism and money. The problem with Marxism is that you need a leader and police to enforce the ideals to make sure that everyone maintains the same view, hence you have Communism.

The problem with utopian ideas like the Venus Project is the transition from a monetary government to the development of the utopia would require a revolution. It would not be a peaceful one unless you have convinced EVERYONE on this planet to quit the monetary system and live together for the greater good. Corporate America, theological societies and religious fanatics would have to see the way of 'the greater good', bow down and change everything that they know and believe.

Essentially, a revolution would have to occur. Which would involve guns, violence and war. If it was the world against the world...you would have World War III. The only way to get the corporate giants to give up their greed and profit is by force. No amount of re-education is going to make the heads of corporations that rule the world change their views. They have the money and they know exactly what they are doing. They will never give up the monetary system, because they own it. They are a product of their environment, so to speak.

If the economy does crash, and it will. Do you think the people that are affected the most will have the resources to start a utopia? Do you think they will have time to think about where to take the first step? If you had the choice to plant seeds in a garden to harvest your own food so you can eat in a few weeks time, or feed your child today; what would you buy? Millions of Africans go through this on a daily basis. When the market crashes the corporations will still be in power. They will find new ways to exploit us, as negative as that sounds.

My point is, is that I don't see how this can come to be. Not without violence and war. Project Venus is about people living together, having the same view and living for the greater good. What did the people that created the Utopia do to the people who did not agree? How were the cities created? Where does the money end and Utopia begin?

What about the sexual deviants? Would it be wise to try to re-educate paedophiles and rapists and let them back into society? Or would you strap some inhumane machine to them that automatically sends a transmission to the brain to stop a compulsion. Prison is inhumane as well; what in the world would society do with them? You cannot say that they are a product of their environment and upbringing as we see them in all levels of society.

Who would build the cities? The machines? You would need some heavy duty machines to make these cities. There has to be a human at somepoint in the evolution of machine that made the A.I robot, that programmed the self-running crane that build the self-running, self-sustaining Utopia.

I would like to see and hear some real ideas as to how to bring down the monatary system. Changing your bank, quitting your banker job and putting in a solar-power roof is a start albeit a small one.

As I am writing this, I am shocked to see an ad for the MORMAN CHURCH beneath this comment box. Aren't people that are supposed to be for the Zeitgeist movement to be against advertisment, let alone advertisment for an organized religious faction of Christianity?! What in the world is that doing there! I don't see how the creators of this site can explain themselves out of that one. I am truly shocked.

Razor,
I accidently pressed "add comment". Sorry.
To continue:
**You have to realize that God did what He did,in order to manifest Himself differently and this for the purpose I've elaborated on on the forum (answering Vlatko/go to "members and see my "last posts"). Take a look at it out if you haven't.
**If this God was the same God (in household rules/manifestation) in today's period of Christianity as He was in the O.T., you wouldn't be around to call Him anything...!

Razor,
1) Why d’ya have a fit with Witt? ?
2) The following was said by David as he was filled with sadness and hate and nevgeance for Babylon who actually did exactly that to Israel’s children!
Psa 137:8 O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
Why did he say this?
This is what Babylon did to Israel’s children!
Something that was previously prophesied! Read:
Ki 8:12 And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
He wanted pay back!
The Bible shows all sides of man.
3)You write:
"So your God better get with the program, and stop being a mean and vengeful, vindictive, and fearsome God!"
God bless!
----Re

I have a very hard time trying to follow your thread and train of thought! It seems you march to the beat of a different drummer!

You say "To the children of a lesser God"? Right! Now we are going to have God wars!
My God is called "All There Is" This beats your God of the Bible hands down! My God even made your God of the Bible! So your God better get with the program, and stop being a mean and vengeful, vindictive, and fearsome God! It is starting to irritate and piss a lot of people off!

I suggest you read all of your Bible, The Old testament, more carefully to see if I misquoted anything, and find your own gems.

I am not even going to comment on your inevitable "Nanny-State" comments, 911, etc: "Sheeple"?? Right!!

To the children of a lesser God: Thanks for reading and not so enjoying my post...I love people who do not make me think a second time but only want to offend me; it says so much about one's lack of intelligence, character, not to mention complete lack of a sense of humor. I know that WTC 7 did not get the historical joke and allusion to a profound ancient Jewish scholars saying about envy when it comes to your zero Vlatko's well squared, not well rounded, visionary shining city on a hill...where everybody gets an ocean view. Totalitarians and authoritarian mental ities always have what is in the best interest of the people on the tip of their tongue (a.k.a. bull shitte #7), but never really have anybody's interest in their heart of hearts or their minds end, let alone soul. Proof is in the pudding of one all powerful Achems Razor's attempt to squelch my free speech, all the while sweeping aside 5,000 years of Judeo-Christian thought and practice by taking his least favorite passages in The Holy Bible and implying that such is central to those that hold that The Scriptures dear. I know of no instance in contemporary history that any descent soul ever did such a thing, let alone used your Biblical misquote out of context as a divine alibi to justify what all thinking people would never condone...let alone since Gutenburgs first printing which, circa exact date escapes my middle aged memory. But go ahead and post the 21 gems up your sleeve...it will no doubt say more about your lack of sanity and historical perspective than any of my poking fun at such losers that believe that The Zeitgeist movies fabricated history of the written word in Bible is but a gross plagiarism of Egyptian mythology; let alone the worst of the worst of the worst of the worst form of humanity and pathological retards that are the pathetic individuals that pollute cyberspace with the criminal hate speech that Loose Change is based on a true story, #7...because, #7, if Bush is Hitler, than Obama is the Incarnates spawn of Satan, and we literally already live in a one party, neo-international socialist one party state...and you and your ilk #7 are the biggest bunch of...but amazingly enough, you still have the right to free speech on the internets. For the love of God or the no God that you believe in, get a clue, and get a life, or just watch "The Gods Must Be Crazy," like I recommended, because you are so full of your own bull shitte you actually believe it is true. You "sheeple" are that gullible...Heaven help us. Peace be with you guys. Pass it on dude. Who's buying, cuz I ain't paying for unlovable losers, whether you want to make me or not.

Witt, it was such a huge load of meaningless crap that you could actually be nominated for the top b...shitter of this site. Hope you got yourself a house and a wife of your liking, so be in peace and stay away. Cheers

Dearest Vlatko, Thanks for sharing your webinsite with the rest of the not so free thinking world wide web. The only thing this thing you call a forum cost me is my time, with a side of mental distress because of what so many people believe is to be true that is really false. But all this Holy Roman Catholic Libertarian can recommend after having viewed, with the best of my analytical and now rhetorical lens, your best of the web TDF Zeitgeist man created mythological tales of a future not yet known but only wet dreamed of (therefore my hard on must mean true love, right) might be better viewed from outside the London fog formed from your self-inflicted adherence to a 19th century pseudo-intellectuals dungeon, who's counter cultural offspring spawned nothing other than a cold war, stunting the growth of most of Eastern Europe by God only knows how much unnecessary growing pains (making the disastrous world wars feel like ancient history): Watch "The Gods Must Be Crazy." Then, through nothing but a heavy dose of laughter as the best medicine, you might come to realize and understand that Joanna C is just calling it like it is, because she is not full of her own made up B.S. This ingenious 80's mockumentary is no more, no less a made up in search of episode and supposed scientific examination into man's free will and human associations than anything the worlds most monstrously successful documentary con artist of the now still young 21st Century. At least for comic relief I can watch, when I have some time to waste, thanks to your site, something other than Fahrenheit 911, that so many lost souls believe is based on a true story...because they so beLIEve in empty and meaningless sayings of a schist-er lawyer who made millions during the worst economy since the Great Depression doing nothing other than writing questionable books about himself: Hope and change. Notice the irony Vlatko. Anyone who believes in him, most definitely does not believe in Him...but the former keeps watching Zeitgeist, making for God knows how many bong hits, yet none from the land of the lost souls in cyber space can quite bring themselves to read a really Good Book, ...first edition in print since 1491? Lastly, but most importantly, political and economic freedom are two sides of the same coin: In God I Trust. Without envy, all a man would want is a square house and a round wife...and no one would care for a room with a view. Cheers? Who's buying Vlatko; because there is no such thing as a free lunch, but there sure are a hell of a lot of free loaders and true believers in cash for clunkers. Gotta run on...Peace be with you Vlatko, your friend Witt

Hello everyone!
To begin with, I agree with Joanna C’ comment: June 25th 21:15
“The idea that ‘there is only human behaviour. People act and respond on their enviroment’ that is simply NOT what experience/ (or scientific research) shows.
That’s a materialistic philosophy (like communisim – which I will return to) – and ultimately, why it fails.”

Vlatko hi!
You write (June 25th 22:37) in response to Joanna C. comments :
“I think that people like all the living beings on earth simply respond to the environment. Imagine if you were confined in a cell what would you do? There would be nothing to do. The only thing you do will be thinking. Latter on that will transform into talking with yourself. Let’s go further and assume that you’re confined with one person from the opposite sex. What are your choices than? Talking, thinking, sleeping and sex. Simply you will respond to the environment. Imagine if you’re on a deserted island with a group of people. You will have to adapt, act and respond to the group and the environment (the island).”
----1) From what I can discern, Joanna speaks of the impossibility of such a “perfect” (in quotation marks!) society, for she sees the possibilities of “tomorrow” in the light of “today”. You on the other hand, speak of the possibility of such a “perfect” society, for you see “today” (today’s progress) in the light of imagined “tomorrow”. If this is the case, then Joanna is more realistic in her perspective of the Venus Project, than you are, because she, in greater degree, takes into consideration the tools/factors at hand, rather than simply “believing” in tomorrow’s better “tools/factors” that are today not realistic. It is true though that something not realistic today, may be accomplished tomorrow, but again, a) how big of a task is that “something” and b) “tomorrow” when?? I mean, how many centuries do you need to achieve such a monument of perfect society in one leading (!) country?? In two countries?? Three?? And so on… In my opinion this is clearly a utopia for a great many reasons as I point out in my comments on Zeitgeist Addendum (June 20th 04:47).
2) In your words that I quote, you use the word “imagine” twice to speak of a confined type of situation. The problem is it realistic to “imagine” such a paradise, one that by the way, all who are striving for it today, will most likely never get to see it in their lifetime!
3) Your example of confinement doesn’t accurately parallel a good society of free thinking people and not even a not so good society of free thinking people like ours. I mean, who we will -in agood sense- do the confining?? Is the Venus Project an attempt to brainwash people to the point there are “confined” to certain actions, behavior, tendencies, to thinking “inside the box”… without them even knowing it? And who’s to say the Ven.Proj. knows what’s morally wrong with society to begin with?? How many agree with them? How many will agree with them in the future? (Perspectives on morality are at the base of all relationships.)
Also, Joanna said:
“Please understand that communism began (and continues to be justified throughout) as a scientific, social-based system which investigates possibilities to benefit all. That is it’s very essence!”
And you (Valtko) respond:
“You say that communism was a project that started based on “scientific method”. Maybe yes, but every communist society is a dictatorship society which is far away what Zeitgeist proposes.”
---True, but you are missing the point; communism -on paper- started with good intentions, just like the Venus project does (or says it does), and still wound up a dictatorship! Is this impossible for the Venus project, definitely not! And today’s and tomorrow’s technology can make it a way worse dictatorship, one that humanity has never came close to know!! God forbid!
One last point. You write (first sentence above):
“I think that people like all the living beings on earth simply respond to the environment.”
---I don’t want to be suspicious, or ask a ridiculous question (I do hope it is!), but do you mean “respond”… without thinking, robotically? What I’m getting at is, do you believe “thinking” is an illusion that sprang up in “the course evolution” (as theory has it), or is it an actual/real process of free will??
Thanks for your time.
Cheers!

Initially, I thought of saying a few words with respect to the similarity btw the Venus Project and Communism (as I also lived in a communist country), but I realized a lot has been said about it already, so I wouldn't add anything except support the views that the Communism and the Venus Project are two totally different concepts.

Joanna C raised the issue of the relationship btw unemployment and crime rate in today's society and asked what would happen if the population, basically as a whole, had nothing to do. The question is legitimate but I think it neglects the fact that in societies today one has not too many options - if you don't work, you don't have money, and without money your options are to either starve or get into crime which will bring you money to survive.

From what I understand, in a society envisioned by the VP, unemployment as a social category is redundant as there is no money. One offers its expertise to the society voluntarily. Hence, in a society where you don't need to think about how to pay for your food, rent, credits, clothes... you don't need to worry how to survive the next day or month. So you don't really have to go and rob or kill - why would you if you have all you need for free.

If you have an interest in how to grow mushrooms, you would have the time to learn how to do it and then simply do it - no need to pay for equipment, fertilizers, and whatever else that requires. Or, you were always interested in becoming a rocket scientist but you couldn't even dream about it in the system where you have to pay a lot of money to get adequate education.... Now you have a chance - AND the time - to learn about rocket science!

The point being here - yes, perhaps without work - but not unemployed, i.e. people would have a chance to employ themselves with anything of their personal interest. And feel good about themselves.... Now, that's something we are made not to feel too often...

Vlatko and some others have commented on the issue of environmental and circumstantial conditioning of people. I am a 100% in agreement. For example, most of the crimes in the developed world are committed by people from the poor stratum of society. That should be an indicator as to the faults of the monetary system.

I agree that there are quite a few gaps in this society of a possible future to be filled, primarily concerning the initial period of transition from the monetary system to a free-human system. For instance, how would one deal with sexual offenses as they clearly are not purely criminal but have more to do with the psyche? Sanatoriums perhaps? But that already requires some kind of societal organization that I'm not sure I've noticed the Project is covering.

Exactly what I pictured, Joanna.
It seems nice, a world in which science, philosophy, technology, logic influence global policy.
But what will happen to those who don't adhere to society's principles? In this "new age of science, conservation, and philosophy", what happens when individuals wish to follow their own creeds, which may run counter to that of society's?
Who's to have authority over how things are run? Scientists, engineers, and philosophers? What happens if power is attributed to (for example) scientists who favor eugenics, engineers who see no value in human life respective of the "grand design", or philosophers who believe humans are evil and are supposed to suffer or be subject to a ruling elite?
Then, over time, it degrades as societal defects accumulate: Maybe in the form of individuals who seek greater share of control over decisions...then energy...then (whatever form wealth takes in this "future").

And, ironically, this isn't an issue of good or evil but rather a fundamental characteristic of being human.
Animals don't want to die, so when they create ways to die less and survive longer, overpopulation creates the conditions which wipe out nearly (if not) all individuals.
Man doesn't like being under observed control (observed in comparison to subconscious, pervasive, and/or subliminal control, which is preferable for most people) so opportunity to hold on to control (ie power) means working less, suffering less, being questioned less, etc... I think there are no social control structures (ie democracy, socialism, this zietgiest proposal) that work. Eventually, democracies will fall under the debt of the depreciating dollar, other social structures will rise and fall as well, and it's all a matter of learning from past mistakes and moving forward (in which case there is no hope for mankind).
Entropy is the nature of the universe, more organized structures lose energy (stability) when keeping the structure stable. The system degrades until the only thing left is chaos, of which is pure energy (disorganization) that births the energy (will power and guidance) to reconstitute systems (social order and structure)....which will only degrade, continuing the cycle.
It's actually quite graceful when one's ego isn't involved because it means there is no point to either continuing or ceasing what we do as people...living, dying, space travel, a new pair of Nike's, the wife and kids, the fossil fuels, the renewable energy, religion, these comments, your opinions...nothing and everything matters.
I gotta go poo...which also matters nothing (EVERYTHING...damn Taco Bell) to the universe.

There is one resource who scarcity this manifesto does not, and ultimately cannot address, and that is time. No cure for death is proposed, nor is one ultimately possible. To be sure, we can anticipate that in such a highly optimised, human-centric societal model, life extension will be a major prerogative and its facilitation a key objective, but so long as death remains an ultimate inevitability, the human condition will fundamentally not change. In fact, without the distractions of the need to work and survive in the kind of competitive environments we live in today, I would expect people to dwell on this and related existential issues to a far greater extent, with all kinds of consequences: substance abuse, nihilism and associated crime, etc. And these are not diseases that can be cured because the fundamental problem cannot be solved, at least not without re-engineering us into Stepford Wives.

It isn't really logical to have a world run by computers; you have to understand our reliance can only go so far. Because of our reliance on the virtual world has also had an up rise in isolation. Anti-social behavior is complimented. Nietzsche wished for a world that the human consciousness was our god that we in fact are the creators. Nietzsche hit a problem though, by isolated himself from humanity, his philosophy was left a stand still because he could not see beyond, left with a hollow existence, and we truly need others to ‘share’ knowledge with. We need that struggle, and that certification of our ideology among ourselves and others and not purely in reliance with technology, as much as it may aid us. We need to feel capable, and be comfortable being human and not wishing to further that. I mean comfortable, because a lot of fear that is projected is the uncertainty of our own fears of the unknown. To be reliant on something else would devalue us as human beings and repeat the cycle of religion all over again. After all we created these things. Which is what I ‘think’ the Venus project is trying to avoid. Very similar to our reliance on somebody running our society, and political parties, because we essentially feel we need that security because we lack it in ourselves, most times we fear what is in us because we have been socially conditioned to do so.
People from what I know, like to struggle, they are masochistic and sadistic because otherwise why would we do half the things we do even when we know we shouldn’t? Like get in an awe full relationship when we know already what’s going to happen? Go to war, when we know it kills. I admire the Venus project because it does in affect use resources that will last, that are efficient. But the human condition, our emotions will forever be with us: we will never be a truly be an ideological race of intellectuals. I can see the similarities with communism having read Kant, as much as I liked his work, this maximization assumes we as humans will like this ‘goal’, but it can always change (I’ll address this in the next paragraph :D). That we won’t struggle against it and that humans will not be swayed to corruption. But from what I understand, they are implying: if not this is purely assumption - this is because EVERYBODY will have the same intellect, constantly expanding one another’s knowledge it won’t be selective, or hidden away in conspiracies and covered up, people won’t have a need to be ignorant. This is the idea that there will be no lies, because the other person already knows the lies aware of the same information, or they will be open to it and challenge it, constantly.
Sorry forgive me I forget the guy’s name. But I came upon him when I was looking at architecture. From what in understand about the project (which is fairly limited having only watched this video and questioning somebody else about the Venus project) that this is merely progress in the making. It is a goal, by pointing out what currently affects us and what the further goal is, but constantly adding to it. This is what Philosophy is: the constant re-evaluation of thought and expanding it. So using knowledge we know and constantly going back and editing and not making it an absolution like we have viewed many things in the past. The fact is at the very moment, they are trying to make us aware of the way our world runs, because we are very blind to what is happening. Although the idea that everything is intertwined just goes beyond my own mind. I think personally one of the things they should have pointed out more, is that our way of thinking and the way we view the world is what lets these old fools get away with what they are doing now, the fact they are constantly fooling the majority. As it has been proved conformity is like a disease, stupidity spreads in large amounts of people.
(sorry peeps about the grammar mistakes, I tried my hardest to clean it up.)

The comments above, Ive read over a number of times, many pretty amazing Ideas as to the human psyche and how it evolves.

I wont speak too much on the politics, since I believe whether we relate The Venus Project to a former political system or not, it should be evaluated on its own merits and demerits.

Vlatko,
yes we have evolved/adapted to our environment, we are in the end a product of our environment, thus as a society we have evolved as such.
You are saying that we can create an environment that has no social ills, thus allowing people to evolve or adapt socially towards a utopia.
Is this really possible?
What is greed and the need of power but a manifestation of a human beings competitive nature? Is not this competitive nature within us the VERY reason we have evolved. (Survival of the Fittest, is partially based on competition within nature)
But lets not stay there since Evolution is still questionable.
Jeff D. I think it was stated that he has friends that would not care if they were in a house close to a freeway or one close to a great view, I believe that's a SERIOUS underestimation on his part, since I am sure if you ask anyone, "you can chose between two houses, one on a freeway and one with a beautiful cliff view" ... you get the idea. Even if they do not have to lift a finger to live, they would want the one with the better view.
But this is not the concept I'm putting forward, simply a side note.
Now say we remove the competitive nature of man, then remove the need to do anything to survive (work), then remove the necessity to make major decisions by having a computer do it, ... then why would we need to be alive? ... A hedonistic society that lives on "joy" would not survive long. People are able to "enjoy" their happiness because of the hardship they go through, ever heard the idea that you can only be as happy as you have been sad since they are two sides to the same coin. Though this may not be scientifically accurate, think of it like this. If someone gave you $20 back in the 40s you would be EXTATIC because $20 was a hell of a lot of money, now if someone gave you $20 you just say thanks.
This concept extends If happiness is the "norm" then no one will be able to experience any of the amazing moments of joy we now do. As in, the joy we experience now from say rushing home and seeing your child's face beam as he/she sees you because he/she missed you, would be FAR more than the joy we feel seeing the child all the time with nothing better to do than take care of it.
There are many other examples but ill get back to the main topic.
Continuing the concept of removal: If all of these things were removed how will we develop or evolve further. Art, Technology, Developing new Ideas, what would be the necessity to do any of it? Yes there are a few people that do things simply for the joy of it but do we not strive to do better, out of our competitive nature, to get to the moon faster, to paint the best picture, to build the best building, to come up with the correct Theory, there are VERY few and I would say none that are willing to work as hard as they can to produce something that is the best of the best and not want to put their name on it (ego part of competitive nature) and even if they do not I am sure it would irk them.
One cannot remove a persons competitive nature, to do so would make us all into drones, which would in the end preclude the necessity for our existence.
And in saying so along with our competitive nature, come ego, greed, need for power, we cannot get away from them ... Instead of using these words with bad connotations, what If I say with our competitive nature comes ambition. With this comes those who want the View and those who don't, as in any society some are more ambitious than others. Does it really make sense to have a society that lacks ambition, doesn't that stagnate us?

My apologies for being long winded and possibly vague at times but I have never tried to present these ideas before, I hope though, that the reader will understand what I am trying to say and within it the reason why I think The Venus Project will not only, not work because we cannot remove man's competitive nature, but is bad as well because if we remove man's competitive nature, we would stagnate humanity.

As a footnote, obviously different people are ambitious to different degrees, some want to change the world while others want to sit watch tv and eat for as long as they can without moving. But it is always the people that want to change the world that end up giving us advances in every field, and not the people who sit around and do nothing. So is it sensible to wean the world shakers out of our world or the couch potatoes?
The Venus Project says keep the potatoes toss out the World shakers.

Initially I posted the following under the wrong Documentary, please excuse this error. I will follow this post with another that is more pertinent to the comments on this film.

Why is it that people need a society, or a “movement” of some sort? Are beliefs some how ratified because people make a community bound by it? Zeitgeist claims to be for “free thinkers”, that it is based on science, that some how its philosophies are a new and modern form of thought. Thus the newly made “free thinkers” of this age who after shaking of the disillusionment of their previous illusion, probably a prophetic religion, are seeking something to fill the void and … “poof” … you can be a free thinker if you follow us because we got lots of scientific facts to strengthen your ideas that what you previously believed was wrong. Pretty much dong the same thing Scientology does, praying on the lack of the Abrahamic religions ability to be relevant to the modern world.
I agree with many of the economic reform ideas, as well as many of the ideas for religious “reform”, yes, it is a thought provoking film, but will I allow my self and my society to be ruled by a computer?. Lol I am a Computer Engineer that has done research on clustering and high performance networking, as well as done classes on A.I. structure. There is almost no way a computer run society would work as this movement presents.
Before I continue, I hope the viewer realizes that (probably) all of the previous shows as well as this one, all lead up to the presentation of “the venus project” and to start accepting applications, only a VERY SMALL part of it was to actually enlighten people, though I respect the fact that they did.

Think of this situation a building is burning, a single child is inside, a computer is asked, save the child or not. 2-3 valuable members of society (firemen) would have a 20% survival rate trying to save a single child that has as much probability of being a mooch on society as being a genius, thus the solution is, let the child die. This is a VERY simple example but the concept stands, we cannot be lead by a computer program, there is simply no humanity in it, and there is no ability as of yet to program compassion or even emotion. Yes, you can program an emotional response to a particular situation but not actual emotion, and as soon as you program emotion you will end up with the same problems as we have today just that robots will be a new “race”
As well the simplest of flaws would be .. so who programs the computer..? .. what if someone hacks into the computer and changes something … lol too many flaws.
I am a bit vehement above in putting down the makers of Zeitgeist when I should not be, they have a good idea, but it is almost a cult like presentation with an obvious agenda, the ends of which if left to grow unhindered would end up in nothing dis-similar from where we are today, just with different names for each faction.
As well, freedom of spiritual thought, we are all one, so so many more ideas that are presented as “new” ideas are all presented in Vedic philosophy, one of earths oldest recorded religions, lol even modern Hindus don’t realize this because just like anything that is passed too long through the hands of man it gets warped, no matter how good and relevant the root was.
What is the solution, honestly I do not have one as of yet, but I know that this one will not work, in its entirety.
Think on this, in the early days of Christianity (well Judaism to be exact, but who were christians but Jews who thought Jesus was the “Christos” and not just a cool guy.), were they not the “free thinkers”. The main religion was multiple gods all whom you had to pay tribute to (Egypt) the followers of Moses said noooooo we have 1 god who you don’t have to waste livestock on you don’t have to do so many silly rituals or anything that takes up your day, and you don’t have to suffer under their rule, just follow us and you will be saved without too much trouble. Now 2000 years later what do we have … lets not repeat previous mistakes.

Lol well end up with a society that prays to a cluster of super computers named ENIAC squared.

Jeff D, while I agree with most of what you say the warning bells went off when you mentioned, “Overconfidence in science isn’t possible! Sciences are not only fact, they are the reasons of our existence, the reasons of our survival to the current day…and we MUST embrace science because it will explain how we can continue our survival as a UNITED species."

On the contrary overconfidence in science happens all the time with the rush to discover the next big thing first, a motive not driven by monetary gain but by pride or prestige.

There are both hard and soft sciences, and even the understanding of facts change as we test our hypothesizes against more previously unknown variables - and understand the bigger and/or the smaller puzzle picture. One example of this is the theory of evolution that in the popular conscious takes on almost religious qualities when attacked by religious creationism.

I am going to say that the theory of thermodynamics and cellular theory are on more solid ground than the theory of evolution. The 'Theory' can only be supported by archeology- the missing link has not been found, and the limited adaptation we can see is when dealing in the laboratory with simple organisms with fast rates of reproduction. As far as I know only limited adaptation and cross-over within the taxonomic category of species has been documented. Mainly due to relatively slow changes in temperature and pH.

The theoretical and practical must be weighed against each other to arise at the best compromise.

The biggest challenge I see for the Zeitgeist project is implementation. Communism is remembered for Stalin when it was created in theory mostly by Marx. In all revolutions (especially violent ones) their is a large chance for a dictator to take control because of a failure in accounting for practicality or the absence of democracy in the decision making process. Communism became in the real world effectively a modern Theocracy. We must be aware and watch so the same thing does not happen in the future.

HUNTING AND GATHERING SOCIETIES: consist of small number of people gaining their livelihood from hunting, fishing, the gathering of edible plants, and sharing them with each other. Few inequalities. Difference of rank limited to age and gender.
AGRARIAN SOCIETIES: based on small rural communities, without towns or cities. Livelihood gained through agriculture, often supplemented by hunting and gathering. Stronger inequalities than among hunters and gatherers. Ruled by chiefs.
PASTORAL SOCIETIES: size ranges from a few hundred people to many thousands; depend on the tending of domesticated animals for their subsistence. Marked by distinct inequalities. Ruled by chief or warrior king.
TRADITIONAL SOCIETIES OR CIVILIZATIONS: very large in size, some numbering millions of people. Some cities exist, in which trade and manufactures are concentrated. Based largely on agriculture. Major inequalities exist among different classes. Distinct apparatus of government headed by a king or an emperor.
(YOU WILL SEE IN WHAT I WROTE BELLOW WHY I MENTION THESE TYPE OF SOCIETIES)
Because humans evolved as part of the world of nature, one would assume that human thinking and behavior are the result of biology and evolution. In fact, one of the oldest controversies in the social sciences in the “nature (human nature)/nurture (environment/society/culture…)” debate: are we shaped by our biology, or are we products of learning through life experiences (nurture)? Whereas biologists and some psychologists emphasize biological factors, sociologists stress the role of learning and culture. They also argue that because human beings can not make conscious choices, biology nor culture wholly determines human behavior. Self awareness which mean we have conscious which allow us to have either intelligent or ignorant choices. To kill or not to kill. human nature exist but not the way u are trying to make a point in, because if a child was taught to be selfish he will be selfish, if he was taught to be generous he will be generous. But while going threw out life the selfish kid might become generous based on what his journey threw life taught him, and vice versa. Human nature has nothing to do with greed. Human nature is having the need for survival, having the need to protect your baby when in danger, when a baby root for his mothers nipple, crying when annoyed or angered( even though many kids don’t)… greed, selfishness, hate, inequalities, love, romance and many other virtues or portraits were developed later on threw the society . romance was created during the medieval era, when a lord have a mistress and have an affair with her… as you see many behaviors developed threw out time when a society changed it culture, it leader, religion, government style…. Many Indian tribes lived equally in harmony and peace, and then you had another Indian tribe that was a warrior culture. Most our behaviors are determined on our environment, even thought we have some that come from human nature, we are conscious beings that have a brain, that know when we are harming someone or not, we know to be peaceful, the majority of the people live peacefully together, but it is the greed and corruption of a few (leaders, corporations…) that make us think differently of what is truly happening.
I recommend you read an article called “Tapping the mood gene” by Kramer, Peter D. was published in New York Times July 19, 2003. It gives you an idea on nature and nurture.

Now back to the subject, communism failed because of inner corruption/ extremism/ and outside interference. Personally I am against communism; I am more of a socialist type of guy, but with many of different views. I agree with many of what this video stated. But I believe war is need for us to stay sharp, to stay advanced in weaponry and still have strategic and quick think if were to be in a war. Even though if a peace to happen war games among soldiers on the field should be practiced because no matter what we will need to know how to protect our self because no one know who will attack.

I would like to thank all involved for a very intellectual and informative conversation. This is rare to come across. I agree very much so with Vlatko and Jordi. Joanna, you have brought up some good points, and pose some of the most difficult questions Zeitgeist will ever have to answer. However, I can accurately dispute most of your claims with the knowledge I have obtained.

First, I will reinforce that a resource-based economy has nothing to do with communism. It isnt merely a "variation of tech." Try a complete technological advancement! The possibility of this economy didnt exist until the last 15 years or so. This is incomparable to any economy you have previously read about. Also, because of its' relevance to current technology levels it is the best proposal of economic structure ever created but, at the same time, is obviously not perfect. The reason it is not perfect has a lot to do with the human aspect, as you say, but these flaws are only a fly on a horse's ass. You claim this will unravel the economy...if this were the case, how would our completely backwards economy today ever hold?? An environment with no incentive to steal or kill is an incredible upgrade. The people that are exceptions who still want to kill and steal could be questioned and learned from Then the information gained would be taught to future generations to help prevent it from occurring again. A few cases here and there would certainly not deter the drive of an entire planet.

As for greed, every form of it has been created from scarcity. And forms of it can easily be eliminated by the elimination of different scarcities. This new economy eliminates most of the "scarce" things in society today (money, food, water, etc.). Perhaps it cant annihilate the greed a human has for a particular partner but this is once again a minor setback to this practical system.

Vlatko offered a lot of insight on the problem of deciding where an individual or family resides but that can be even further expanded on. Contrary to what you seem to believe, most people will consider this situation as irrelevant. Most people I know would be perfectly content living next to a highway while living for free and not having to work.

Nit-picking is easy, and your concerns are important in developing this into a more sound idea but i think it would help to step back and address the more important questions before you refute the movement by nit-picking. Can you agree that this economy is exponentially greater than the current monetary system? Does the overall intent actually seem corrupt to you? Think about it, the philosopher behind a great majority of this idea, Jacque Fresco, is 93 years old (no chance of achieving power) and he is working off the passion in his heart! THERE IS SUCH THING AS UNCONDITIONAL LOVE AND THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF IT! He wants mankind to move in a sane direction and DONATED all of his knowledge of this proposal to society.

As for the intent of this movement...to say this movement is looking to gain power is nothing but an absolute projection of the insecurities most people have developed from the corruption you have seen in the past. It is great to be skeptical but you have based your assumptions off of irrelevant material. Look the system up and down, tell me where you see power as a problem, and what benefits it could bring to a person. Everyone has access to all technology and materials.

The "government" is a super-computer and, naturally, many fear this. The goal is to program this computer to answer questions OBJECTIVELY by inputting knowledge gained throughout the history of humankind (mainly science) and having it answer questions based on everything we know. Without the human aspect interfering! That is the key to making this work! Developing a truly objective system, as a greedy mind may attempt to alter, is the most important new idea suggested by this movement. As long as that is achieved, it will be the best way of decision making EVER. Opinion-based decision making has long been the root cause of societal problems. When coming to conclusions based on fact, as opposed to opinion, you undoubtedly get better results. "Overconfidence in science" isn't possible! Sciences are not only fact, they are the reasons of our existence, the reasons of our survival to the current day...and we MUST embrace science because it will explain how we can continue our survival as a UNITED species.

With an army of informed people that speak with the purity and fact surrounding this issue, I know it is possible. Right now a very small percentage of the population has been exposed to this idea. Once the world knows of it, it's only a matter of time before truth overtakes corruption by way of the masses refusing to support their money-biased governments and leaders.

Vlatko, you present some excellent points. I have gained a lot of insight from your writing. You said "..on my own site" Did you create this site? If so, thank you very much. I can't tell you how much this has already enlightened me, in my few weeks use, on various topics (not this one, fortunately I was already informed). I also appreciate the great exposure you're giving the zeitgeist movement, whether intentional or not, please continue that because it is of utmost importance to the movement. My passion lies in seeing this movement further develop and becoming largely involved in its progression (as a environmental engineer specializing in renewable energies).

Hi Max and Jordi,
And yes Jordi, there is a disagreement on human nature.
The idea that 'there is only human behaviour. People act and respond on their enviroment' that is simply NOT what experience/ (or scientific research) shows.
That's a materialistic philosophy (like communisim - which I will return to) - and ultimately, why it fails.

One can have plenty of wealth and still be greedy.
One can have very little and still be very generous.
Humans are more than just reactive things to environment, - but beings with the power to choose, with the power to think and make choice for conscience and, against it.
There's the 'psyche' aspect which is arguably more important than the envionmental conditions.

Greed as in the excessive desire in pursuit of money, wealth, power - cannot be eliminated, simply by superficially eliminating them from the equation - because these things are not 'eliminatable'. That's the point...
Resource management as the doco puts it, means controling wealth or money. They're just ways to quantify values. They are the same thing. Land has resources or not (i.e. is wealthy or not).

Neither is power. The will to power as almost all psychologists or philosophers agree is THE dominant force behind human existence. We will always strive for more power, whether over our environment, other people, or, when channeled at its best - over ourselves.
The want for control, for 'the better', drives human nature.

But rather than getting into the philosophy, just a few practical questions will make this clear:
- in those beautifully drawn visionary cities, consider who gets the appartment that overlooks the beautiful mountain, and who gets the one next to the freeway? Who decides, how?
Since it's inevitable that someone will have a worse position than another, do you think, s/he will not develop the will to get to the top in this form of society and whatever new rules it invents?
- in this documentary, it also gives an example that with a small drop of unemplyment, crime rates rise. (and we know that around the world, social welfare takes care of survival needs) What will then happen when 90% plus of people have no effectual work to do?
Since the will to power in not channeled in work, the will for power over others will inevitably increase (and it needs nothing to do with money - but fear, respect, better positions in places... etc)
Who will police this state? How? Why would the police not be attracted/ corrupted by their power?
And so on... and so on...

Just have a look at Adam Curtis doco, it will show exactly how the system collapses, from a systems thinking point of view.

Please understand that communism began (and continues to be justified throughout) as a scientific, social-based system which investigates possibilities to benefit all. That is it's very essence! No one risked their lives in the revolutions that followed to create a "monetary system where few can benifit from power, money or wealth." (that was the end effect of course, but not what was intetended)
Communism was/is about a new 'scientific method' of organizing resources, of organizing society, where it is fair on all - rather than for the benefit of a small few.
(For better understanding of it, you can read the classic "Animal Farm" book.)

Actually, it's kind of proof of the bad logic of this doco that it suggests that 'scientific method' is the answer to a better world.
Scientific method is the very engine that drives today's society in every aspect, already. Where more would Zeitgeist like to add it? It's everywhere, and it's applied with a capitalistic zeal too!
There's nothing new about it... It has been around well before the ideas of communism began, and they also said that 'scientific method' was the solution.

So, how is it "nothing" like communism?
The words can change, but the principles are identical. It's major difference I have already mentioned - in the past they thought electricity would make work easier for all, (latest science for their age) now it's robotics (latest science for ours)... and I may mention that it attempts to form a government via a computer, rather than people.
(Which is actually not really a solution, for a computer cannot actually 'think' -- but is more like a screen for some group to have the power, the acceess to wealth/ resources... And so, the cycle begins.)

Probably this is the first longer response to any of the comments at TDF by me. I have written so many stuff on the various places on the net (forums, blogs etc.) but I have not engaged in debate at my own site. So lets go and fire up this place.

I have to tell you Joanna C that I disagree with you. Here is why:

I think that people like all the living beings on earth simply respond to the environment. Imagine if you were confined in a cell what would you do? There would be nothing to do. The only thing you do will be thinking. Latter on that will transform into talking with yourself. Let's go further and assume that you're confined with one person from the opposite sex. What are your choices than? Talking, thinking, sleeping and sex. Simply you will respond to the environment. Imagine if you're on a deserted island with a group of people. You will have to adapt, act and respond to the group and the environment (the island). Now if you're in a modern society you'll have to act, behave, respond according to the environment (society) . If not you'll be kicked out from it. In most cases the result is prison, sanatorium, exile etc. You're born in society, you act according to the society.

Greed is not intrinsic characteristic of human beings nor the thirst for power. The environment is demanding greed and thirst for power. The societies are demanding greed and thirst for power. Man was trained for thousands of years that way. Humanity had trained itself over thousands of years of evolution to be greedy and eliminating the greed would be the most difficult thing to do. The Zeitgeist Movement only proposes that we are maybe evolved enough to start thinking that this old method of living (in societies like communism and capitalism) is becoming hindrance to our real progress. It is true that humanity is spending way more money on making bombs and all kinds of weapons than spending money in all other areas combined. The core reason for that is the sole existence of nations, religions and societies. So the nations, religions and societies are using the science as tool for dominating over each other instead of using it as tool for real progress of the humanity as a whole.

You're mentioning the visionary cities and asking who will get the house with the best view and who decides for that. Well the cities are round shaped and all the houses are the same and replicated all over the city. Further more the cities can be built in a places where the surrounding is quite similar all around. Further more the surrounding can be artificially made. I mean there are so many solutions for that problem.

The other question is what 90% of the people would do since they will have 24/7 spare time. Well what would you do if you had that time for yourself. Pause and think for a moment. In most cases there will be no answer because people over thousands of years are trained to work for their food. Nobody can properly guess what would people do with all that time.

You say that communism was a project that started based on "scientific method". Maybe yes, but every communist society is a dictatorship society which is far away what Zeitgeist proposes. I think that scientific method is not the engine that drives todays societies no mater if they're communist or capitalist societies. Every scientific invention today is depending on money but most of the scientist are not inventing for money. Do you imply that the todays most prominent scientist Steven Hawking is doing his job for money? It can be safely concluded that the scientists are intelligent passionate people who are exploited by societies for bad purposes. Every invention in a first place is tested for military purposes. Why? Because of the greed, thirst for money, power and domination. If those things are gradually eliminated and they can be eliminated only with removing the frames that are generating them (nations, religions, societies) only than science can be used in right direction.

Cheers.

Jordi
- 06/20/2009 at 16:07

Joanna, the point you are making still reflects on a society as we know it now.
I think we disagree about the existence of human nature.
As this documentairy is explaing; there is only human behaviour. People act and respond on their enviroment.
If there is an abundance, not for some people but for all people, there is no real need for greed and other negative human behaviours.
Greed is the excessive or rapacious desire and pursuit of money, wealth, power. (wikipedia)
What the zeitgeist movement philosophy is; is to deduct money,wealth and power thus, there is no need for greed.
If a system is designed in such a way that there is no way to gain money, wealth or power it would simply vanish.
I think because this idea is such an enormous difference from how we are living now, it's more or less the same like people said the earth wasn't flat but round.
There is a lot more detailed info on the website of zeitgeist movement how we van achieve this ideal enviroment.
This philosophy is nothing like communism, because communism is still based on a monetary system where few can benifit from power, money or wealth.
Also it is still based on a political system and not a science/social-based system, which investigates possibilities to benefit us all and not just a liberal party, for instance.
In that manner, this system is alot more "sane" then this actual system which only benefits a very small partion of all humans. 2/3rd of this world (more or less) is slave for us (european, northamerican) which seems enormously unfair to me..